Saturday, September 2, 1972. The Federation of Arab Republics.

The federation's flag.

Egypt, Syria and Libya ratified a plebiscite taken the day prior to unite their nations in the Federation of Arab Republics.

This was the second such attempt at unification of the Arab states, and notably it did not include all of them.  With the prior attempt having failed, the suggestion from Egypt was to attempt a looser political federation.  Radicalization in Libya quickly caused Egyptian distrust of that entity and the 1973 October War, featuring Egypt and Syria, was undertaken without informing Libya.  As it was, Libya was upset by the resulting peace which led towards the collapse of the effort.  It officially dissolved, having never really existed in November, 1977.

Tuesday, September 1, 1942. Miscarriages of Justice.

On this 1st day of September 1942, the United States District Court in Sacramento, California ruled wartime detention of Japanese Americans to be legal.

Japanese Foreign Minister Shigenori Tōgō (東郷 茂徳) who had opposed war with the United States on the basis that it was unwinnable, resigned and went into retirement.  The cause of his resignation was his opposition to the creation of a special ministry for occupied territories.  He was appointed thereafter to the upper house of the Japanese Diet, but did not take an active role in it.

He returned to his former position in April 1945 and worked towards acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration.  He advocated Japanese surrender after the atomic strikes of August of that year.  

In spite of his opposition to the war, he was tried as a war criminal in 1948 and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment.  He died as a prisoner two years later at age 67.

He was an unusual man in multiple ways.  He'd studied in Germany when young and then entered the foreign ministry.  He served as ambassador to Germany in 1937 and then later was assigned to the Soviet Union, where he'd negotiated a peace settlement between the USSR and Japan following Khalkhin Gol.  He married German Carla Victoria Editha Albertina Anna de Lalande, who was a wide of was well known German architect, with Japanese marriages to Westerners being uncommon then, which remains the case today.  She survived him and died in 1967.

Tōgō's family, including his wife's daughter by her first marriage and the couple's daughter.  His descendants have continued to have diplomatic careers.

Both of the examples above provide interesting examples of the miscarriage of official justice.  Internment should have been deemed illegal, particularly as to U.S. citizens who were truly being deprived of their liberty without due process.  And while there were Japanese war criminals, Tōgō''s conviction seems to have been for simply being on the losing side of the war.

Royal Air Force Wellingtons bombed Afrika Korps supply lines at night, destroying fuel supplies, which halted Panzerarmee Afrika for most of the day.  

Wellingtons over Europe.

We don't think of Wellington bombers much in the story of the war, but they did in fact see combat service.

The Germans took the Black Sea port of Anapa.

According to the Wyoming State Historical Association, on this day in 1942 official approval was given to commence use of the Casper Air Base, which had been constructed in an incredibly small amount of time.  The existing county airport was Wardwell Field, the Casper area's second airport (the first was in what is now Evansville).  Today, what was Casper Air Base is the Natrona County International Airport, which actually uses at least one fewer runway than was constructed by the Army in 1942.  Wardwell Field's runways, in contrast, are city streets in the Town of Bar Nunn.

Monday, August 31, 1942. The arrest of the Schulze-Boyen's.

Today in World War II History—August 31, 1942: Australians launch offensive against the Japanese at Milne Bay, New Guinea. Canada requires unemployed men and women to take war work.

An interesting entry on Sarah Sundin's blog.

I wonder how many unemployed Canadian men there really were by this point in 1942?

The aptly named Libertas Schulze-Boyen, a German aristocrat, and her husband Harro, a Luftwaffe officer, were arrested by the authorities.

The couple had in fact gone from being Nazis or radical right winters, Harro even had a swastika carved into his leg, to being the focal point of the Red Orchestra, a resistance group that was centered on providing information to the Soviet Union.

Libertas was a French protestant by birth, but fit into that oddly European class of aristocratic families that were nearly stateless.  She attended school in Switzerland and moved to Germany in 1933 where she joined the Nazi Party and was, at first, an ardent Nazi. She married Harro in 1936, after having lived with him a year, something very unusual at the time.  Herman Goering gave her away at the wedding, showing how close they were to senior Nazi figures.

Harro, in contrast, had opposed the Nazis since 1933, being therefore a really early resistance figure.  He had been part of the "Radical Nazi" organization Black Front, which was a Nazi splinter group formed by Otto Strasser which kept the original socialistic Nazi economic policy which the party abandoned under Adolph Hitler.  He was also from an aristocratic family, and one that had ties to publishing. Both Harro and Liberas were writers.  He became a pilot in 1933, and in spite of being an anti-Nazi joined the Luftwaffe.

In spite of their common opposition to the Nazis, their marriage was not a united one. Harro was a self-confessed libertine, and she had caught him in bed with an actress, which nearly led to their divorce.  Only the fact that they were both involved in their resistance movement kept this from occurring.

They were both executed in December. She was 29 and he was 33.

German tanks made it through the minefields at Alam el Halfa and turned north to attack what he supposed to be the Allied rear, only to be met with anti tank guns and tanks staged there by Montgomery.  Montgomery, moreover, did not deploy his tanks in the old cavalry melee style that the British had done previously, although German and British tank losses, 22 and 21 respectively, were about equal.  The Afrika Korps lost one of its senior commanders, Georg von Bismarck, due to a mine.

The British small scale raid Operation Anglo attacked Rhodes.

Thursday, July 2, 1942. Churchill's government survives an attempted Motion of Censure.

Members of the British Army's Special Air Service in North Africa with American Jeeps.

A Motion of Censure of Churchill's government was brought in the House of Commons, and then overwhelmingly failed.

The motion was brought due to recent reversals in North Africa, although the recent setbacks in the newly started war with Japan played a part as well.  Churchill specifically noted that he expected fortunes to reverse as British forces started receiving American arms.

Churchill had stated in response to the motion:

The will of the whole House should be made manifest upon important occasions. It is important that not only those who speak, but those who watch and listen and judge, should also count as a factor in world affairs. After all, we are still fighting for our lives, and for causes dearer than life itself. We have no right to assume that victory is certain; it will be certain only if we do not fail in our duty. Sober and constructive criticism, or criticism in Secret Session, has its high virtue; but the duty of the House of Commons is to sustain the Government or to change the Government. If it cannot change it, it should sustain it. There is no working middle course in wartime

Interestingly enough, things were already turning around, or at least not getting any worse. The Afrika Korps failed to take El Alamein for the second day in a row, with Briitsh forces mounting a counterattack that took 2,000 prisoners and 30 field guns.

The Tirpitz and Hipper, with escorts, left Trondheim to attack Allied convoy PQ17.  Seventeen He115s attacked the convoy unsuccessfully.

PQ17 was being shadowed by submarines and flying boats.

Monday, June 29, 1942. More German advances.

Meresa Matruh, an Egyptian port city well into Egypt, fell to the Afrika Korps. Rommel's forces were now advancing at a rapid pace into Egypt.  

The city today remains a significant Egyptian port.  It's history stretches back into antiquity.

The city in 1942, Allied armor column.

They also reached Sidi Abd el Rahman, which was only 20 miles from El Alamein, even further East.  The city today is a tourist destination, although large numbers of landmines still exist in the area.

Mussolini flew, as the pilot, from Italy to Libya, carrying his white horse in anticipation of a complete conquest of North Africa in near days, and a triumphal parade in Cairo.

The Germans were also advancing rapidly in the southern Soviet Union. Dust columns from German forces could be seen from a distance of 40 miles.

The Germans crossed Severnaya Bay at Sevastopol by boat.

Admiral King proposed an invasion of the Eastern Solomon Islands to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Wednesday June 24, 1942. Eisenhower takes command.

Dwight D. Eisenhower arrived in London to assume command of the European Theater of Operations United States of America, replacing James E. Chaney.

In fact, Eisenhower had only recently returned to the United States on a fact finding mission, along with Hap Arnold, on the United Kingdom in which he expressed a lack of confidence in Chaney.  He was assigned to replace Chaney and sent right back to the UK.

Eisenhower's star was on the rise at the time, and would be throughout the rest of his life, taking him to the White House.  He was the last U.S. Army general officer to become President.  Notably, an Army career was mostly an educational choice for him, rather than the expression of a military vocation.

Chaney would fade into obscurity.  Having been promoted to Major General in 1940, he was an observer of the Battle of Britain and would return to become commanding general of the First Air Force, and then become a training officer in the United States.  Late in the war he was in command of Army forces for the mostly Navy action at Iwo Jima, and he had a senior role in the Western Base Command at the end of the war.  He retired in 1947.  He, as well as his wife, died in 1967.

The Afrika Korps entered Egypt.

Tuesday, June 23, 1942. Married men exempted from the draft.

US soldier in training, June 1942.

Sarah Sundin reports on her blog:

Today in World War II History—June 23, 1942: RAF captures first German Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighter plane, which lands by mistake in Wales. President Roosevelt signs bill deferring married men from the draft.

The FW 190 was a great aircraft, the best German fighter of the war, if you discount the ME262 jet fighter, which I think you can.

The married men draft deferment removed 18,000,000 men from the draft pool and was designed to intentionally use up the pool of eligible single men first.  The exemption would not last, although it did last for a while.  In April 1943 married men were once again eligible, but could be exempted if their conscription imposed an "extreme hardship" on their wives or children. 

This exemption would be reinstated at some point during the Vietnam War, leading to some rushed marriages in order to avoid conscription.  I'm not really sure what I think about it, frankly.  It was probably more defensible during the Second World War during which men remained the sole "bread winners" for many families and couples.  Indeed, while women did of course work during the war, the scale at which women overall worked is exaggerated in the popular recollection of the war.

Hitler authorized the Afrika Korps to pursue the 8th Army towards Egypt.

Thursday, March 16, 1922. Trendsetters.

Walcott Rouse, March 16, 1922

 

On the same day that young Mr. Rouse was roller-skating with his dog in Washington, D.C., Ahmed Fuad Pasha was proclaimed King Fuad I of Egypt, making him one of only two kings in the country's mondern history.

He is mostly remembered for his son, who had a flamboyant if rocky and odd history.  Faud himself had an unhappy relationship with Farouk's mother, and indeed with both of his queens.  His first wife, Shivakiar Khanum Effendi, was his first cousin once removed.  They divorced in 1898, but Faud was shot in the throat by her brother during a dispute with her.  He survived that.  In 1919 he married Nazli Sabri, who was the maternal great-granddaughter of Suleiman Pasha, a French Napoleonic officer who converted to Islam.  She outlived Fuad but immigrated to the United States, reversing her great-grandfather's act, and converting to Catholicism.   She possessed the largest jewelry collection in the world.  Her youngest daughter Fathia also converted to Catholicism.

Louis "Lepke" Buchalter was released from Sing Sing and would go on in his criminal career, fairly shortly becoming the head of what was called "Murder Inc".  The latter was an organization in which the Mafia could arrange for contract killings through non Mafia members, thereby insulating them from implication in them.  Buchalter was executed for his crimes in 1944.

Wednesday, February 4, 1942. Men of miscalculation.

In North Africa, an odd event known as the Abdeen Palace Incident occurred, as was reported by Sarah Sundin in her blog:

February 4, 1942: In North Africa, British retreat ends at Gazala, Libya. Japanese take Ambon, Netherlands East Indies, from a small Australian garrison. British troops surround Egyptian palace in Cairo to force King Farouk to abdicate.

I'd note, FWIW, that I disagree with that date for the Japanese taking Ambon, I think it was February 3.  But the date for the British coup in regard to King Farouk is quite correct, although he did not abdicate.  Rather, he was forced to accede to a new government.  He remained the king for another decade.

King Farouk in 1946.  He as a member of the Turco-Circassian elite in the country, which owned 3/4s of the land at the time.

Farouk was, suffice it to say, an interesting figure who was the king over an interesting country.  He was of Circassian, Turkish, French, Albanian and Greek descent, meaning he lacked Arab or Egyptian genetic heritage.  His bodyguards were Albanians, the only people he trusted in that role.  His actual heritage was more Circassian than anything else, due to the presence of various Circassian slave girls in his heritage.  He became king at age 16 and never got along with the country's British representative, Miles Lampson.  He strongly favored Italians over the British.

Egypt had technically been an Ottoman possession until World War One, and after that was technically independent but was in fact a quasi British satellite with various treaty obligations to the British.  It was not a declared combatant in the war, but treaty rights in which the British had the right to station troops there to defend it meant that it was in fact a combat theater.  Beset by a complicated domestic travails, including the lack of a male heir, he lived a lavish lifestyle which, early in the war, caused him to lose favor with the Egyptian people who were aware that the British royals were sacrificing during the war.  His palace did not adhere to blackout provisions in Cairo.

The British exerted heavy pressure over who would hold office in the Egyptian government and Farouk generally yielded to them, but on this day their displeasure over the makeup of the government boiled over.  Farouk asked his military leaders how long they could hold out against the British if they refused British demands, and were informed that they could only do so for two hours.  On this night, the British presented Farouk with an ultimatum and troops surrounded his place.  Ultimately, they stormed it.  Farouk capitulated and a new Egyptian government was formed.  The British representative, unbeknownst to him, was lucky to leave with his life, as Farouk's body guards were hidden in the room, ready to open fire if he was touched.

Ironically, the event caused the Egyptian people to rally behind Farouk, who resented the obvious British termination of their chosen government in favor of one that would do the British bidding. Farouk did not rise to the occasion, however, and the event marked part of his slide into increased gross personal excess in every imaginable fashion.  It also marked a turning point in Egyptian politics as Egyptian military leaders became opponents of ongoing British presence, something that would ultimately lead them to depose Farouk and take over the country, with their rule effectively continuing on to the present day.

Farouk's popularity with Egyptians did not last, and he was deposed in 1952 as noted, spending the rest of his life in Italy.  The entire matter ultimately proved to be a British disaster.

As an aside, his sister, Princess Fawzia Faud, would be Queen of Iran in an arranged political marriage with the Shah of Iran from 1941 to 1948. The marriage brought Iran added status, not Egypt, as the latter was the more important state. That marriage ended in divorce.  She remarried an Egyptian army officer/diplomat and lived the rest of her life in Egypt, dying in 2013.

Also on this Wednesday, February 4, 1942, Hermann Goering met with Benito Mussolini regarding the invasion of Malta.  Mussolini wasn't impressed.

Suffice it to say, the day for German invasions had really passed.  The Germans had essentially concluded that it was incapable of invading Great Britain and had turned its eyes East, oddly partially, at least, for that reasons.  That of course brought about the invasion of the Soviet Union, which was not going well.  

The Germans and Italians were not going to invade Malta.

In North Africa, however, the Germans and Italians were doing fairly well, which perhaps gave rise to the delusion that they'd be in the position for a Maltese offensive.  On this day they took Dema, Libya.  British lines, however, were forming.

Lord Beaverbrook was appointed head of the Ministry of War Production, which had been created on this day.  He resigned after occupying the office for two weeks.  The Ontario native clashed with another figure in the administration and determined to depart the agency.

Wednesday, June 4, 1941. Kaiser Wilhelm II Passes

 On this day in 1941, the former Kaiser Wilhelm II died in the Netherlands where he remained in exhile.

A portrait of the Kaiser in what were, for him, better days.

Never reconciled or approving of the Nazis, whom he regarded as using "my army", it was none the less the case that his unyielding autocratic sensibilities and militarism more than helped bring about the disaster that was going on globally at the time of his death.  For their part, the Nazis were not really reconciled to him either.

"His" Luftwaffe bombed Alexandria, Egypt on this day.

The British intercepted a Japanese coded message informing their government of the imminent German invasion of Russian soil, which we'll note, in the spirt if this thread, would be the second Russo Germanic war in about 25 years.  However, due to one reason or another, it was not decoded and delivered to higher ups until after that invasion had commenced.

On this same day, British forces took Mosul in Iraq.

May 23, 1941. Portents.

"Gene Strathman, Virginia (Greteman) Wiese (laying down) and Dorothy (Ehrichs) Kusel"

From:  https://www.davidkusel.com/temp20/strathman/strathman.htm

Think of it. Three high school graduates. . . from 1941. .. graduating right into what will soon be the largest war the US has ever participated in.

On that day British destroyers HMS Kashmir and HMS Kelly were sunk by aircraft off of Crete.

HMS Kashmir.

HMS Kelly at Gibraltar.

The Kelly was commanded by Louis Mountbatten, a member of the British Royal Family.

King George II of Greece left Crete for Egypt.  He wouldn't remain there, as Egyptian King Farouk's foreign minister favored Italy, in spite of Egypt being effectively occupied by the British, or perhaps because of that, and would go to the UK.

May 12, 1941. Roll On Columbia.

 On this day in 1941, Woody Guthrie went to work for the Bonneville Power Administration.

The HMS Ladybird was sunk off of Tobruk. On the same day, however, a large British convoy with a significant amount of British armor in Alexandria.

The Ladybird settled in shallow water where she became an anti aircraft platform, ironically, as he'd been sunk by dive bombers.

The Japanese government delivered to the US government a proposal regarding the ongoing difficulties betwen the two nations.  It read:

CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM AGREED UPON BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN

The Governments of the United States and of Japan accept joint responsibility for the initiation and conclusion of a general agreement disposing the resumption of our traditional friendly relations.

Without reference to specific causes of recent estrangement, it is the sincere desire of both Governments that the incidents which led to the deterioration of amicable sentiment among our peoples should be prevented from recurrence, and corrected in their unforeseen and unfortunate consequences.

It is our present hope that, by a joint effort, our nations may establish a just peace in the Pacific; and by the rapid consummation of an entente cordiale [amicable understanding], arrest, if not dispel, the tragic confusion that now threatens to engulf civilization.

For such decisive action, protracted negotiations would seem ill-suited and weakening. Both Governments, therefore, desire that adequate instrumentalities should be developed for the realization of a general agreement which would bind, meanwhile, both Governments in honor and in act.

It is our belief that such an understanding should comprise only the pivotal issues of urgency and not the accessory concerns which could be deliberated at a conference and appropriately confirmed by our respective Governments.

Both Governments presume to anticipate that they could achieve harmonious relations if certain situations and attitudes were clarified or improved; to wit:

1. The concepts of the United States and of Japan respecting international relations and the character of nations.
2. The attitude of both Governments toward the European War.
3. The relations of both nations toward the China Affair.
4. Commerce between both nations.
5. Economic activity of both nations in the Southwestern Pacific area.
6. The policies of both nations affecting political stabilization in the Pacific area.

Accordingly, we have come to the following mutual understanding:-

I. The concepts of the United States and of Japan respecting international relations and the character of nations.

The Governments of the United States and of Japan jointly acknowledge each other as equally sovereign states and contiguous Pacific powers. 

Both Governments assert the unanimity of their national policies as directed toward the foundation of a lasting peace and the inauguration of a new era of respectful confidence and cooperation among our peoples.

Both Governments declare that it is their traditional, and present, concept and conviction that nations and races compose, as members of a family, one household; each equally enjoying rights and admitting responsibilities with a mutuality of interests regulated by peaceful processes and directed to the pursuit of their moral and physical welfare, which they are bound to defend for themselves as they are bound not to destroy for others; they further admit their responsibilities to oppose the oppression or exploitation of backward nations.

Both governments are firmly determined that their respective traditional concepts on the character of nations and the underlying moral principles of social order and national life will continue to be preserved and never transformed by foreign ideas or ideologies contrary to these moral principles and concepts.

II. The attitude of both Governments toward the European War.

The Governments of the United States and Japan make it their common aim to bring about the world peace; they shall therefore jointly endeavour not only to prevent further extension of the European War but also speedily to restore peace in Europe.

The Government of Japan maintains that its alliance with the Axis Powers was, and is, defensive and designed to prevent the nations which are not at present directly affected by the European War from engaging in it.

The Government of Japan maintains that its obligations of military assistance under the Tripartite Pact between Japan, Germany and Italy will be applied in accordance with the stipulation of Article 3 of the said Pact.

The Government of the United States maintains that its attitude toward the European War is, and will continue to be, directed by no such aggressive measures as to assist any one nation against another. The United States maintains that it is pledged to the hate of war, and accordingly, its attitude toward the European War is, and will continue to? be, determined solely and exclusively by considerations of the protective defense of its own national welfare and security.

III. The relations of both nations toward the China Affair.

The Government of the United States, acknowledging the three principles as enunciated in the Konoe Statement and the principles set forth on the basis of the said three principles in the treaty with the Nanking Government as well as in the Joint Declaration of Japan, Manchoukuo and China and relying upon the policy of the Japanese Government to establish a relationship of neighborly friendship with China, shall forthwith request the Chiang Kai-shek regime to negotiate peace with Japan.

IV. Commerce between both nations.

When official approbation to the present Understanding has been given by both Governments, the United States and Japan shall assure each other to mutually supply such commodities as are, respectively, available or required by either of them. Both Governments further consent to take necessary steps to the resumption. of normal trade relations as formerly established under the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between the United States and Japan.

V. Economic activity of both nations in the Southwestern Pacific area.

Having in view that the Japanese expansion in the direction of the Southwestern Pacific area is declared to be of peaceful nature, American cooperation shall be given in the production and procurement of natural resources (such as oil, rubber, tin, nickel) which Japan needs.

VI. The policies of both nations affecting political stabilization in the Pacific area.

a. The Governments of the United States and Japan jointly guarantee the independence of the Philippine Islands on the condition that the Philippine Islands shall maintain a status of permanent neutrality. The Japanese subjects shall not be subject to any discriminatory treatment.

b. Japanese immigration to the United States shall receive amicable consideration-on a basis of equality with other nationals and freedom from discrimination.

Addendum.

The present Understanding shall be kept as a confidential memorandum between the Governments of the United States and of Japan.

The scope, character and timing of the announcement of this Understanding will be agreed upon by both Governments.

[Annex]

ORAL EXPLANATION FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ORIGINAL DRAFT [63]

II. Par. 2.

Attitude of Both Governments toward the European War.

Actually the meaning of this paragraph is virtually unchanged but we desire to make it clearer by specifying a reference to the Pact. As long as Japan is a member of the Tripartite Pact, such stipulation as is mentioned in the Understanding seems unnecessary.

If we must have any stipulation at all, in addition, it would be important to have one which would clarify the relationship of this Understanding to the aforementioned Pact.

III.

China Affair.

The terms for China-Japan peace as proposed in the original Understanding differ in no substantial way from those herein affirmed as the "principles of Konoe." Practically, the one can be used to explain the other.

We should obtain an understanding, in a separate and secret document, that the United States would discontinue her assistance to the Chiang Kai-shek regime if Chiang Kai-shek does not accept the advice of the United States that he enter into negotiations for peace.

If, for any reason, the United States finds it impossible to sign such a document, a definite pledge by some highest authorities will suffice.

The three principles of Prince Konoe as referred to in this paragraph are:

1. Neighborly friendship;
2. Joint defense against communism;
3. Economic cooperation-by which Japan does not intend to exercise economic monopoly in China nor to demand of China a limitation in the interests of Third Powers.

The following are implied in the aforesaid principles

1. Mutual respect of sovereignty and territories;
2. Mutual respect for the inherent characteristics of each nation cooperating as good neighbors and forming a Far Eastern nucleus contributing to world peace;
3. Withdrawal of Japanese troops from Chinese territory in accordance with an agreement to be concluded between Japan and China
4. No annexation, no indemnities;
5. Independence of Manchoukuo.

III. (sic)

Immigration to China.

The stipulation regarding large-scale immigration to China has been deleted because it might give an impression, maybe a mistaken impression, to the Japanese people who have been offended by the past immigration legislation of the United States, that America is now taking a dictating attitude even toward the question of Japanese immigration in China.

Actually, the true meaning and purpose of this stipulation is fully understood and accepted by the Japanese Government.

IV.

Naval, Aerial and Mercantile Marine Relations.

(a) and (c) of this section have been deleted not because of disagreement but because it would be more practical, and possible, to determine the disposition of naval forces and mercantile marine after an understanding has been reached and relations between our two countries improved; and after our present China commitments are eliminated. Then we will know the actual situation and can act accordingly.

Courtesy visit of naval squadrons.

This proposal, (b) of IV. might better be made a subject of a separate memorandum. Particular care must be taken as to the timing, manner and scope of carrying out such a gesture.

V.

Gold Credit.

The proposal in the second paragraph of V. has been omitted for the same reasons as suggested the omission of paragraphs (a) and (c).

VI.

Activity in Southwestern Pacific Area.

The words, in the first paragraph, "without resorting to arms" have been deleted as inappropriate and unnecessarily critical. Actually, the peaceful policy of the Japanese Government has been made clear on many occasions in various statements made both by the Premier and the Foreign Minister.

VIII.

Political Stabilization in the Pacific Area.

As the paragraph (a) implying military and treaty obligation would require, for its enactment, such a complicated legislative procedure in both countries, we consider it inappropriate to include this in the present Understanding.

Paragraph (b) regarding the independence of the Philippine Islands has been altered for the same reason.

In paragraph (e) the words "and to the Southwestern Pacific Area" have been omitted because such questions should be settled, as necessity arises, through direct negotiation with the authorities in the Southwestern areas by the Governments of the United States and of Japan respectively.

Conference.

The stipulation for holding a Conference has been deleted. We consider that it would be better to arrange, by an exchange of letters, that a conference between the President and the Premier or between suitable representatives of theirs will be considered when both the United States and Japan deem it useful to hold such a conference after taking into due consideration the effect resulting from the present Understanding.

Announcement.

In regard to the statement to be issued on the successful conclusion of the present Understanding a draft will be prepared in Tokio and cabled to Washington for the consideration of the United States Government.

May 10, 1941. Hess jumps, the Luftwaffe quits, Belgian workers walk.

Hess's wrecked Bf110.

On this day in 1941 Rudolph Hess, operating on his own initiative, took a German aircraft and flew himself to the UK with the expressed intent to broker a peace between Germany and the British Empire.

It's easy to sum up Hess as delusional, which he was.  He was peculiar in other ways, however, which is saying something as the Nazi leadership was overall peculiar.  He'd spent his youth in Egypt, where he was born of German parents, where he acquired an intense racism against non Europeans, rather than being broadened in his views as a person would suspect.  He also, from that experience, came to admire the British.  He'd served in World War One and emerged into an economy in which his family's business interests, of which it had been intended he'd be part of, had been badly damaged by the war, and in particular by the British seizing German interest in Egypt.  He was a very early member of the Nazi Party.  He became the Deputy Fuhrer of the party, an extremely high position in the German Nazi regime.  Following the start of the war his antisemitism grew.

On this day in 1941 he flew a Bf110 to Scotland in the belief that he could establish contacts with friendly British interest and negotiate a peace with the UK. Based on the statement he intended to deliver at the Nuremburg Trial and again attempted to issue in written form in 1986, he actually believed that he'd be able to negotiate a peace and bring the UK into the war against the Soviet Union, something that was then on the near horizon in German planning.

Hess used a Bf110 for his mission, which was a substantial aircraft.  He ran out of fuel near his target, a British estate that he mistakenly believed would house a sympathetic family, and bailed out, breaking his ankle and resulting in his capture by a Scottish farmer.  He was placed in the Tower of London where he spent the rest of the war.  The mission was hugely embarrassing to the Germans as Hess was a significant figure in the Nazi Party, and it was somewhat embarrassing to the British at it was both a reminder of there having been some significant members of British aristocracy who had sympathized with the Nazis before the war and because such a substantially sized aircraft had penetrated over Scotland without detection.

Following the war he was a defendant at the Nuremburg trials.  Being convicted, he spent the rest of his life a prisoner at Spandau Prison in Berlin where he remained an unrepentant Nazi, and he remained a prisoner far longer than any other figure sentenced to prison.  As he had very little in the way of a role after the war started, and served so many more years than any other German prisoner, there were fairly serious efforts to secure his release in later years, which tended to discount that his views had not changed at all.  Neither had the Soviets, however, who vetoed any release as they firmly believed that he was aware of plans to invade the Soviet Union and, therefore, could have warned the British who would have warned them.  At least according to one story, on a single occasion when the Soviets failed to veto his release, the British did.  The prison was torn down following his death in order to avoid having it turned into a Nazi shrine. His grave did become one, however, so in 2011 the Lutheran church on whose grounds it was located had the remains removed and the tombstone destroyed.

On the same day that Hess flew to Scotland, the Luftwaffe bombed London again.  You can read of both events here:

Today in World War II History—May 10, 1941

Huge raid on London

The London raid was the Luftwaffe's last largescale aircraft bombing raid on the city of the war.  The Blitz was winding down and in fact the nighttime raid, which also covered the following morning, ended the campaign.  German air raids over the UK would continue to the end of the war in a lesser capacity, but the largescale nighttime raids that had commenced after the German failure to win an aerial victory ended.  The Germans lost the Battle of Britain and they'd lost the Blitz.  They were not going to knock the UK out of the war through the air, and they gave up trying.  Of course, they also had limited air assets and began to rededicate them to the planned campaign against the Soviets Union.  Indeed, the termination of the campaign supported the British suspicion that the Soviet Union was next, something the British would attempt to warn the Soviets of.

While Hess went on his delusional mission, Belgian workers went out on strike.  The strike was remarkable not only for the fact it occurred in occupied country, but that even the Belgian Communist Party supported it. At the time, the Communists everywhere were generally somewhat pro Nazi or at least not anti Nazi due to the non aggression pact that had been entered into between the Soviet Union and Germany still being in effect.

The strike lasted eight days and ended when the Germans agreed to a wage raise.

Is the Ever Given still stuck?

 Check here, and find out.

February 18, 1921. Œhmichen helicopter no 1, ships, Egyptian self rule, and Argentine arms.

The early history of the helicopter is complicated, and therefore capable of dispute.  Most early flights weren't that, but hops.  

This is the first "lift" of an Œhmichen helicopter. The gas bags were for stabilization.  Obviously, this would have been a completely useless design but it was pioneering, and the inventor went on to some significant developments in helicopter features.  Etienne Œhmichen was a biologist by training and employment.

The USS Hull, a Clemson Class destroyer was launched.

It was another short-lived post World War One U.S. Navy destroyer, and was scrapped in 1931.

On the same day, the USS North Carolina, a Tennessee Class armored cruiser of long service, was decommissioned.

The Armenian government fled the country's capital in the face of the Soviet invasion.  The U.S., which had declined to ratify the Versailles Treaty, left the Allied Reparations Commission.  Lord Milner, a now retired Secretary of State for the Colonies, presented his commissioned report to the House of Commons which argued for the immediate granting of self governance to Egypt.  Argentina, a German customer for arms, refused to stop purchasing the same from the same.

The ruins of a "high production" brewery have been unearthed in Egypt. . .

 or rather rediscovered. British archeologist discovered it earlier, but apparently didn't appreciate what it was.

And what it was, was a brewery that was capable of producing 22.400 liters of beer at a time.

22,400 liters at a time.

That's quite a lot.

The significant thing, moreover, is that the brewery dates to 3,000 BC, some 5,000 years ago. So this means that Egypt was mass producing beer, at least from this facility, 5,000 years ago.

What would it have been like? Well, that's a big guess.  There's been some efforts to brew it, but that involves a lot of guessing in and of itself. All we can say for sure is that they brewed it, and apparently quite a lot of it.

The Secondary Waves of the Great War.

World War Two, for obvious reasons, looms large in our imagination as the biggest event of the 20th Century.  The biggest, and the most significant.

But are we wrong?  

It seems lately that the echos of World War One are resounding pretty loudly.

World War One smashed the old order and demolished the borders of centuries.  The interbellum tried to reconstruct them, but did so in a metastasized and imperfect form, giving rise to new malignant orders that sought to fill the voids left by the death of the old imperial ones.  World War Two pitted three forces against each other, fascism, communism, and democracy, with democracy and communism ultimately siding with each other against fascism. After the war, the results of the Second World War gave rise to a contest between the two victors, communism and democracy, against each other until the vitality of free societies and free markets drove the rigidness of communism to and beyond the breaking point.

And now that communism is dead and gone, buried alongside its evil cousin fascism, the old unsolved questions of the Great War are back.  The rights of small nations, including those with out countries, against the possessions of older larger ones.  The demise of great empires giving rise to smaller ones.  Nationalism of all stripes against everything else.

It's 1919 all over again.

Turkey didn't sign the Treaty of Sevres.

Indeed, rather than do that, it fought it out.

It can't be blamed.  The Greeks had a quasi legitimate claim to Smyrna, but only quasi. A lot of ethnic Greeks lived there, which is no surprise as Anatolia had been Greek. The Ottoman's were invaders to the region, finally taking it in the 1450s.  But it had a large Ottoman population that they were bloodily brutal towards and they engaged in conquest, with the help of their Western allies, in Anatolia proper, seeking in a way to reverse what was lost centuries prior.

The Italian claim, moreover, to islands off of Turkey was absurd.

But the Armenian claims to their lands weren't.

The region sought of Armenia marked for a plebiscite is Kurdistan.  The Syria that ran to the sea and down to Palestine was an Ottoman province carved away from the Empire.  So was the Mesopotamia, i.e., Iraq, that appears on the map.

In 1990, the United States intervened in the Middle East to force Iraq, the British post World War One creation, out of Kuwait, a desert province that the British had protected during their stay in the Middle East, launching operations, with the assistance of others, from that region of Arabia named for the Sauds, that Arabian family that spent the Great War and the immediate interbellum consolidating power at the ultimate expense of the Hashemites, that Arabian noble family who had made war on the Turks.  The British dolled out kingdoms to that family as consolation prizes, with the Hashemites taking Iraq and the Transjordan.  The French got to administer Syria, a region that it claimed an historical affinity to, with the British taking administration of Palestine and Egypt, both of the latter having been Ottoman provinces although Egypt was long administered by the British in an arrangement that nobody can possibly grasp.

And so now, the old fights, and the interbellum struggles, reappear.  The peoples not accorded nations would like to have them. The old empires would like to keep their domains.  Borders drawn by European nations, with the help of Woodrow Wilson, are treated as real, when perhaps they were never correct.

El Arish occupied by the British Army on this date in 1916.

Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: The Islamic State in Iraq and th...

Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: The Islamic State in Iraq and th...: As of today, the situation discussed here has gone from bad to worse.  ISIS, or ISIL, depending upon the term you use, has taken the city o...

And now this horror has spread on to the Libya, where ISIL beheaded 21 Egyptian  Coptic Christians simply for being Christian.  Egypt has retaliated with airstrikes against ISIL in Libya.  This is significant in two ways.  One, it shows that ISIL's reach is expanding.  Secondly, Egypt has now joined Jordan as a Middle Eastern, Moslem majority, country that's now actively engaged in warfare with ISIL.

To my surprise, 10 to 15 percent of Egyptians are reported as being Coptic Christians, a much higher percentage that I would have guessed.  Generally they're second class citizens, but all Egyptians appear to be rallying to their cause.

Not unrelated, a Moslem terrorist also struck at a free speech event in Egypt.  Armed with an automatic weapon in a society which strictly controls access to firearms, he had a pretty free hand so the fact that the casualties were as low as they were is truly amazing.  This event should have the added impact of causing European nations to further wake up to the fact that Islamic extremists are both in their midst, and at war with their open societies.  While I am sure it won't have this effect, it should also cause nations in Europe to ponder their gun control provisions and consider the example of the US, which is the opposite of what they imagine, in that as gun control provisions have very much waned in the past 30 years gun violence has actually declined (which is also contrary to what many Americans imagine).  On a continent which now finds itself at war with a quasi invisible radical fifth column, with access to automatic weapons coming out of the Middle East, allowing the population to protect itself deserves some consideration.

Islamic Violence, Islamic Silence and Western Relativism

This past week the world has been witness to another outrage committed by those who claim devotion to Islam.  If this event were unique, a person could discount it as not really having a basis in Islam in some fashion, but as its far from unique, a person can't and shouldn't.

Over the past couple of years alone we've seen Moslems blow up a bomb during the Boston Marathon, kill French cartoonist and magazine staffers, murder a British soldier in his home country in the street, attack the Canadian parliament, and wage a war combined with barbarity in Iraq and Syria.  Each time this occurs, people in the west, indeed people in much of the world, are told that we are not to assume that this means such actions accurately reflect any tenants of Islam.  Indeed, a White House spokesman was quoted in The Weekly Standard as saying this past Thursday:

There are some individuals that are using a peaceful religion and grossly distorting it, and trying to use its tenets to inspire people around the globe to carry out acts of violence. And we have enjoyed significant success in enlisting leaders in the Muslim community, like I said, both in the United States and around the world to condemn that kind of messaging, to condemn those efforts to radicalize individuals, and to be clear about what the tenets of Islamactually [sic] are. And we’re going to redouble those efforts in the days and weeks ahead.

That's all well and good, but a statement by the U.S. Presidency to this effect has exactly zero effect as a statement on behalf of Islam, influencing Moslems, or really doing anything at all.  Something like this would mean something if it came from a really influential Moslem cleric, but it does not, at least in so far as this statement is concerned.  So, does this accurately reflect real Islam, or not, or can these acts be squared with Islam, or not?

Well, maybe they do not, maybe these people are nutty outliers (I suspect at least some of them clearly are, if not outright mentally disturbed) but unfortunately maybe they do, at least to some Moslems.  Indeed, a recent poll of Saudis found that over 90% view ISIL's actions as consistent with Islamic tenants.  Now, a person has to be careful about that, as consistent with, and mandated by, are two completely different things.  Indeed, its completely possible for a person to abhor something in a faith, while being a loyal member of it, but while also regarding that thing as "consistent with" the faith.  So, I don't take that to mean that Saudis all are supporting ISIL by any means.

But all of these things together, combined with a poll figure like that, should tell us something. And the general, or at least apparent, silence up until quite recently of Islamic leaders who count when these things occur means even more.

Generally, the people who are quick to assert that "Islam is a religion of peace" aren't Moslem, and in fact, Islam really isn't a religion of peace consistently in regards to non Moslems.  The founding document of Islam, the Koran, isn't consistently peaceful by any means.  Nor does it recognize a separation between religious and civil government.  As Christians well know, Christ instructed his followers to "render until Caesar things which are Caesar's" but Mohamed, who of course rejected Christ's divinity (although in actuality may have been more of a Gnostic in reality, rather than as he was later remembered and quoted), left no such instruction.  For that reason, early Islam featured a unified government for its adherents, and that government waged war against its neighbors.

This early history, and the foundation of the religion, is extremely important in this context.  From the outside, when observed in a historical context, the origins of Islam can be and are debated, but a long held school of thought which still holds much historical weight would place very early Islam in the category of Gnosticism but advanced by a very charismatic leader.  That early Islam probably didn't really hold all of the same tenants of the current one, but it did fight its neighbors, sometimes with Christian allies even in Mohammed's time (which again would tend to suggest that early on it was actually a species of Gnosticism, rather than a new religion).  The Koran itself, to non Moslem students, seems to have been written in an evolutionary fashion, with earlier portions being less aggressive than later, perhaps reflecting the evolution in conditions on the ground that Mohamed and his followers were facing. 

Of course, to almost all Moslems, and certainly to any adherent Moslem, this view is all wrong and they would argue that the Koran is the word of God, and that's the way it is. And for Moslems, therefore, the violent portions of the Koran cannot be ignored as Moslems have to deal with them in some fashion.

But they can be interpreted differently, and there are those who have argued that they should be.  Particularly recently.  Indeed, a major Egyptian figure is arguing that this be done right now, and there have been Moslem clerics also arguing the same, recently.

That modern conditions aren't exactly the same ones that Mohamed faced in his lifetime are pretty obvious, and that humans have largely evolved past the point where every national difference must  be solved by violence or warfare, if that was ever really the case, are gone.  Indeed, the world is becoming more peaceful, not less, so this violence stands out more and more as an aberration.  But it doesn't seem to be an aberration in Islamic terms.

And it won't seem to be until that point at which most Moslems make it clear that they not only aren't resorting to the gun, but that they don't approve of it being done.  And so far, that really hasn't been the case.  Much like peaceful Communists, or the hard right, in the 1920s and 30s in Europe, people tend to wink or be silent in the face of violence committed by those they agree with on other issues, and that truly ended badly. The time has really come for Moslems in Europe and the United States to take a stand, one way or the other, and hopefully against violence.  Not until they take that brave act will this trend abate.  Of course, doing that is made doubly difficult now, as for anyone to do it in this climate they risk being branded a traitor or heretic by those who support a violent view, and beyond that there's no recognized central authority in Islam and hasn't been since the original Caliphate fell apart many centuries ago.  Indeed, the only body really claiming the the title of central authority is ISIL, and even thought the overwhelming majority of Moslems don't recognize that claim, at the same time there's no other central authority and there doesn't appear to be any way for one to be recognized in the present age.  And so, almost by its very nature, its really difficult for any Moslem leader to have a voice, unless he's very much in the global news, and that only tends to be nobody at all. So even when Moslem clerics do decry violence, and they sometimes do, it's almost never heard by anyone, even when they do occupy a position of respected authority.

That is particularly problematic, as with no central authority, there's no vehicle for reformation or interpretation that is really controlling.  Indeed, the complete lack of a central authority really makes Islam unique, as almost every other faith has one.  Even highly fractionated Christianity has that in that the various denominations do, and even though some would be reluctant to admit it, the ancient structure of the Catholic and Orthodox world is looked on for guidance by everyone.

So we face a crisis of collision of cultures in a way that we have not for some time, with an absolute need for a group now highly associated with violence to declare against it, with no easy way in which for them to accomplish that.  But they really need to.

Assuming we aren't too late now.  We've been near a tipping point in Europe for awhile, and now that we've seen this in France, a nation that has a long and complicated, and not always peaceful history, with Islamic residents, things are going to get much worse in terms of the political climate in Europe, or at least they could.  The time, therefore, for a large and effective Moslem declaration that this isn't what they support is here now.  Assuming, of course, that they really truly do, as a group, abhor such actions.  If they do, they should make that loudly plain now.

But at the same time, we should also take note, contrary to the claims of some, that the story of Islam in the West isn't really one solely of immigration, but also one of conversion.  There's a lesson to be learned here as well.  Islam is filling a void in the west left by something, and that something may be the demise of clear religious and philosophical sets of purposes.  

What exactly has occurred here remains unclear, and is still an evolving story, but as late as World War Two it was still the case that a large majority of Europeans adhered to at least some world view based on Christianity or, if not, social justice in a concrete sense.  Not all of the political movements were admirable by any means, but most people did have a sense of the greater and lesser, and the founding central focuses of those views was pretty concrete. This has tended towards collapse in recent years leading towards an increasing view of absolute relativism on everything. As a result, Europeans have been shocked with cultures that have not taken this path collide with them, as they increasingly are, and not just in regards to Islam, but also to Europe's giant eastern neighbor.  

And relativism turns out not to be a satisfying philosophical concept for anyone. As the "everything is equal" and "all conduct is okay as long as it doesn't hurt anyone" ethos has crept in, human desire to find meaning in something, anything, other than money, has likewise increased.  Ironically, at the same time, central institutions of all type have increasingly adopted relativism as their more or less official positions. As traditional European institutions or institutions that were traditionally strong in the west have weakened, many have been aimless and others have turned towards those institutions that have their base in distant lands, but which seem more absolute.

As official positions, relativistic institutions don't work, particularly on anything founded on a strong thesis. This doesn't mean that a person must agree with one particular thing or another, but it does mean that institutions shouldn't hide their basic concepts or dilute them to the point that they're nearly meaningless.

For when they do, there is always something left to fill that vacuum.  And in an age when many of the Christian religions in Europe have diluted their faith to the point that it isn't very recognizable, and when many social and political institutions seem mainly focused on what the best way for an economy to make money is, those who are looking for something to give their lives meaning have to look pretty far.  And for some of them, that will be Islam, as whether a person agrees with it or not, Islam seems to know what it believes.  Countering a strong belief with the ethos of "it's nice to be nice to the nice and everyone is nice" isn't going to cut it with people who are searching.  Indeed, it  really doesn't cut it with anyone.

So we've reached this point.  And its a bad one.  Maybe its time for those who have a foundation in something to declare what it is, and for those who have a foundation in something that others feel licenses violence, when they feel otherwise, to state that.

Postscript

Of note here, and of interest, a fair number of newspapers in the Middle East have, in fact, run cartoons from their cartoonist decrying the terrorists' acts.

That's a brave thing to do, given where they are from, and  its exactly the type of reaction from that quarter that's needed here.

Postscript II

And there was indeed a good turn out for the March in Paris, which did indeed include some significant Moslem figures, including clerics and King Abdullah of Jordan.

So, perhaps things have turned a corner.

Postscript III

For the first time, I've heard a really good explanation, but a noted religion writer, on the topic of this type of violence and Islam.

Of note, according to this author, who seemed very well informed indeed, such violence is in fact not sanctioned by Islam, even if Islam's history and texts have some violent aspects. A partial reason is that there's no authority that has authorized it, which can authorize it.  Indeed, there would appear to be no authority which can in fact authorize it.

Additionally, it appears that the violence has in fact turned off a large segment of the Islamic population everywhere, to such an extent in fact that the religion is loosing a significant number of adherents in some areas, including Iran, where those abandoning the faith are either completely abandoning any faith, or are converting to Christianity.