Line of least resistance
Sir: Professor Charmley can hardly be seri- ous in alleging that I argue that Neville Chamberlain should have taken 'a gamble' on Romania's single-line railway (Letters, 12 December). Russia's support of Czechoslovakia was only one of several rea- sons why it would have been better to fight Hitler in 1938 rather than in 1939. Definite- ly Russian air and ground forces would have strengthened the Czech power to resist and encouraged the plotting German generals to topple Hitler. Charmley is correct in saying that Cham- berlain in 1939 guaranteed Poland when he had no means of sending military aid. Here is a further argument why it would have been better to fight in 1938 than 1939. In 1938 in central Europe, Hitler would have had to contend with a strong Czech army reinforced by the Russians, and as a result would have had much weaker forces to defend the Siegfried Line against a French attack. In 1939, Poland, with Russia back- ing Germany, was an easy prey. The archival evidence that Germany was weaker in 1938 than 1939 is conclusive. It is a mistake to confuse this issue with fanciful arguments as to whether Britain should have declared war on Germany either in 1914 or 1939.
Richard Lamb
Knighton Manor, Broadchalke, Salisbury, Wiltshire
Previous page
