Chapter 16 Volume 1, Chapter 12. Interval for rearmament: Spain

1936｜1937 British Foreign Policy New Overlords League of Nations Two-year interval 6 June 1936 My Memorandum on the Question of Supply Agencies Gathering in the Special Hall, the abdication of King Edward VIII, the wisdom of Mr. Baldwin, the enthronement of King George VI, a letter from the Emperor, Mr. Baldwin's retirement, and Mr. Chamberlain's appointment as Prime Minister. The changes in the cabinet. A conversation between Baldwin, Chamberlain and Ribbentrop. In this chapter I may wish to set out the principles of British European policy which I have followed for many years and which I continue to follow.In late 1936 I was invited by the Conservative Foreign Affairs Committee to give a secret speech which best expressed these policy principles.

Britain's foreign policy for four hundred years has been to oppose the emergence of the most powerful, aggressive and domineering country on the continent, especially to prevent the Low Countries [1] from falling into the hands of this country.Historically, people and things, circumstances and circumstances have undergone many changes during these four centuries, yet this purpose has remained the same, which is most prominent in the historical records of all races, nations, countries or peoples in the world one of the things.Also, in any case, Britain has always taken the harder road.Against Philip II of Spain, against Louis XIV under William III and Marlborough, against Napoleon, and later against Wilhelm II of Germany.At those times it was not only easy, but very tempting, for England to join the stronger side, and share in the fruits of its victory.However, we have always taken the harder path, joined the less powerful side, joined forces with them, and defeated and defeated the military overlord of the continent, whoever he was or what country he ruled.Thus we have preserved the liberty of Europe, and the growth of a vibrant and changing society in Europe.After these four most important wars, our country emerged in the world with increasing prestige and expanding empire, while the independence of the Low Countries was protected and safe.This is an unconscious fine tradition of British foreign policy.Today, our thinking is based on this.I know of nothing that has altered or diminished the justice, wisdom, courage, and prudence in which our forefathers lived.I know of no event in human nature that would in the least detract from the reliability of their conclusions.I don't know of anything that would make me feel that our abilities are inferior to theirs, whether military, political, economical, or scientific.I don't know of anything that makes me feel like we won't or won't be able to move forward on this path.The reason I take the liberty of proposing this proposition of great general importance to you is because I feel that if it is accepted, all other matters become simple and clear.

【1】Refers to the Netherlands and Belgium.translator Note that British policy does not take into account which country is trying to dominate Europe.The question is not whether it is Spain, or the Kingdom of France, or the French Empire, or the German Empire, or the Hitler regime.This policy has nothing to do with who the country is or who is the ruler; it only cares who is the most powerful, or dominant tyrant.Therefore, we should not be afraid of others saying that we are pro-French and anti-German.If the situation changes, we can also be pro-German and anti-French.This is the law of international policy that we are following; it is not a matter of expediency according to chance, or subjective willingness or unwillingness, or some other sentiment.

This raises a question: Which country is the most powerful today, trying to dominate Europe by means of violence and danger?Today, during the year, or up to the first half of 1937, the French army was the strongest in Europe, but nobody was afraid of France.Everyone knows that France just wants no one to bother it, and that it has an army only for self-defense.Everyone knows that the French are peaceful and fearful of their neighbors.They are brave, determined, and peaceful, but anxious about their situation.They are a free country with a free parliamentary system. Germany, on the other hand, is not afraid of others.It is building up its armaments on a scale unprecedented in German history.It is led by a handful of smug desperadoes.Under this despotism, the economy grew increasingly difficult and discontent grew.They will soon have to choose between economic collapse and civil strife, or a war whose sole purpose and, if won, its sole Europe.So, I think what happened in the past is happening again now, and to save our country we must once again unite all forces in Europe to restrain, restrain, and if necessary defeat German hegemony.For, believe me, if Spain, Louis XIV, Napoleon, Kaiser Wilhelm II had become supreme rulers of Europe with our help, they would have plundered us after their victories and made us reduced to lowliness and poverty.We should make it our highest duty to preserve the survival and continuity of the British Empire, and the greatness of this island nation, and not be led astray by fantasies of an ideal world, which is nothing more than the admission of worse dominions from other nations into our land , let them control our destiny.

At this stage, the broad concept and extremely important institution of the League of Nations became an important factor.The League of Nations is in fact a British concept, and it is in perfect harmony with all our previous methods and actions.In addition, it is completely consistent with the general concept of right and wrong and the concept of peace based on the containment of the main aggressor country that we have always followed.It is the rule of law and liberty among nations and within nations that we look forward to, and for this purpose and no other, the founders of our honor, greatness, and civilization fought and fought through all ages Tough to win.The most cherished ideals of the British people are the rule of law in international law and the settlement of disputes among nations through patient discussion on the grounds of law and justice.Let us not underestimate the enormous role these ideals have played in modern British democracy.It is not known that these seeds have been sown in the hearts of working people for centuries.They are as firmly rooted in the hearts of working people as their love of liberty.We cannot ignore these ideals, for they are the quintessence of the island nation's qualities.We therefore believe that the support and strengthening of the League of Nations will prove to be the best way of safeguarding the security of our island nation, and of the great cause of humanity which we have always considered our interests to be at stake.

My three propositions are: first, we must oppose the future overlord or potential aggressor; second, in the present Nazi Germany, with its huge armaments and developing so rapidly, it must play this role; Three, that the League of Nations should bring together many nations in the most efficient manner and unite the peoples within our own borders to control future aggressors.It is with the utmost respect that I take the liberty of presenting these few principal theses for your information.Other questions will be deduced from this. It is easier to discover and formulate certain general principles than to apply them.First, we must value our strong alliance with France.This is not to say that we have to be unnecessarily hostile to Germany.It is our responsibility and in our interest to reduce the tension between these two countries.As far as France is concerned, we have no difficulty in doing this.France, like us, is a parliamentary democracy, very much opposed to war, and, like us, has obstacles in the conduct of defense.So I think we should take our defense alliance with France as a fundamental thing.Today, when the situation has become so serious and dangerous, everything else must be subordinated.

A person who has a definite theoretical system and a deep belief in it is always in a better position to deal with the changing and unpredictable than the short-sighted person who acts impulsively on the basis of everyday information.The most important thing is how to decide the direction of action.Personally, I advocate the establishment of an armed international alliance, with as many countries as possible participating, with Britain and France as the core, against potential aggressors.Let us do everything we can to build this great international institution!If the work is beyond our power, or fails through the weakness or error of others, let us at least secure the full and real hope that England and France, the two surviving free nations of Europe, will be able to stand together After any storm attack, return to Hong Kong safely again.

If the United States is added to the side of Britain and France; if the name of the potential aggressor country is changed; does not apply. Hitler occupied the Rhineland in March 1936 and annexed Austria in March 1938. There was a gap of two full years.The interval was longer than I expected.Things proceeded exactly in the order I had foreseen and pointed out, except that the interval between two successive disasters was longer.During this period, Germany wasted no time.The fortification of the Rhineland, or the Western Wall, proceeded apace, and a vast and permanent or semi-permanent fortification was erected without pause.The German army has been established on the basis of a complete conscription system, and there are enthusiastic volunteers as a new force.The German Army is improving every month not only in numbers but also in the maturity and quality of its organization.The German air force not only maintained its superiority over the British Air Force, but also surpassed the British more and more.German arsenals were working extremely hard.In Germany the wheels turn day and night, the hammers beat day and night, turning the whole industry into an arsenal, fusing the whole population into a disciplined machine of war.At home, Hitler began in the fall of 1936 a four-year plan to reorganize the German economy so that it would be more self-sufficient in the war effort.Abroad, he forged the strong alliances mentioned in Mein Kampf that were necessary for German foreign policy.He made an agreement with Mussolini, forming the Roman-Berlin axis.

Until the middle of 1936, Hitler relied not on his strength but on the disunity and cowardice of Britain and France and the isolation of the United States in pursuing his policy of aggression and breaking the treaty.Every step he took for the first time was all desperate, and he knew that he would not be able to withstand serious resistance from the other party.Occupying and fortifying the Rhineland is the biggest gamble.All turned out to be very successful.His opponent was too indecisive to accept the challenge.When he took the second step in 1938, his intimidation was no longer a bluff.His aggression was then backed by force, and probably superior force.By the time the French and British governments discovered this dire change, it was too late.

I continue to monitor our readiness closely.I am on good terms with Sir Inskeep, the Defense Coordinator, and I have done my best to assist him in private.At his request, I wrote him a memorandum, which was June 6, 1936, advocating the establishment of a supply department.See Appendix (3).But until the spring of 1939, nearly three years later, the government did not take effective action to establish a Ministry of Supply, nor was it prepared to take emergency measures against our country's arms production. At the end of July 1936, Spain's parliamentary government was declining and the revolutionary movement of communism, or anarchism, was gaining momentum, resulting in a long-planned military mutiny.According to the teachings and textbooks of communism formulated by Lenin himself, communists should assist all leftist movements and help weak constitutional, radical or socialist governments to come to power, and then destroy them and remove them from their declining hands To seize power and establish a Marxist state.In fact, what happened in Spain was a pure replay of Kerensky's era in Russia.The difference is that Spain's strength has not been seriously damaged by foreign wars.The army remains fairly united.In addition to the conspiracy of the Communist Party, there was simultaneously a secretly planned plot of military mutiny.Neither force acts lawfully and aboveboard.All classes in Spain had to consider the future of Spain.

The Communist infiltration of this decaying parliamentary government has wiped out the usual guarantees of a civilized society.Both sides began to carry out assassinations.The plague of communism was so rampant that their political opponents were caught and executed in the street or in their bed.In and around Madrid there were many assassinations of this kind, culminating in that of Sotelo.He was the leader of the Conservatives, a sort of Sir Carson in British politics before the World War of 1914.The crime became the signal for the army generals to take action.General Franco had written to the Spanish Army Minister a month earlier, making it clear that the Army would intervene if the Spanish government could not maintain normal legal safeguards in everyday life.In the past, Spain's military chiefs have made many declarations.After General San Juljo was killed in a plane crash, General Franco raised the banner of rebellion.He has the support of the military, including ordinary soldiers.On the Church side, with the notable exception of the Black Robes sect, he is supported by nearly all of the right and center.He immediately became the head of several important provinces.Some Spanish sailors killed their officers and joined groups that soon belonged to the Communist Party.Communists seize power when civilized governments fall, and they act on their teachings.A brutal civil war began.The communists who took power brutally massacred their political enemies and wealthy individuals.Franco's men returned on a grander scale.The Spaniards died with astonishing delicacy.Many people were shot on both sides.The cadets defended the military academy at the Alcazar in Toledo with great tenacity, fighting fiercely.At this moment Franco's army marched from south to north, leaving traces of vengeance in every Communist village, and finally rushed there to relieve them.This is an episode that deserves the attention of historians. I am neutral in this conflict.Of course I am not in favor of communism.If I had been a Spaniard then they would have killed me and my family and my friends, and how could I have voted for the Communist Party?I do think, however, that the British Government has much to do of its own, and it is not natural for the British Government to inquire into Spain's affairs. France proposes a non-intervention package that would allow the two sides to fight without foreign aid.The governments of the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and Russia are all in favor of this plan.As a result, the Spanish government, now in the hands of the extreme revolutionaries, could not buy arms through proper procedures, although it had gold in its hands.It would have been more reasonable to follow the normal course of action and admit that the two sides were at war, as we did in the American Civil War in 1861-1865.All major powers have adopted or formally agreed to a policy of non-interference.The UK strictly abides by the agreement.But Italy and Germany, on the one hand, and the Soviet Union on the other, broke their promises, and they kept fueling the fight.Germany, in particular, used its air force to bomb the small, undefended town of Guernica in an experimental terrorist air raid. In France, Mr Bloom replaced Saro's cabinet in June to form a new government.The government was pressured by Communist supporters in the House of Representatives to aid the Spanish government with military supplies.M. Cote, Minister of the Air Force, was not much interested in the strength of the French Air Force, which was now in decline; he secretly aided the Spanish Republic with aircraft and military equipment.I was so disturbed by these happenings that I wrote a letter to French Ambassador Corbin on July 31, 1936: I tried to maintain the old ideas, but I encountered a great difficulty, which was the German proposal of a union of anti-communist countries.If France sends arms, etc., to the present Madrid government, and Germany and Italy join the other side, then I am sure that the dominant power here will be closer to Germany and Italy, and alienated from France.Please don't mind me telling you this, it is of course entirely my own opinion.I don't want to hear that Britain, Germany and Italy are united against Eurocommunism.This is the worst thing. I am convinced that strict observance of neutrality and a strong protest against violations of neutrality are the only correct and safe course at present.If the civil war stalls, perhaps one day the League of Nations may intervene to end the terror.However, despite this, I don't think it will work. One more thing, should be recorded here.On November 25, 1936, the ambassadors in Berlin were invited to the German Foreign Office, and Mr. Neureit announced to them the details of the anti-Comintern pact agreed upon by the German and Japanese governments.The purpose of this agreement is to take joint action against the international activities of the Comintern in or outside the contracting states. Throughout 1936 there was growing national and parliamentary anxiety, especially with regard to our air defence.During the debate on the Prime Minister's Reply in Parliament on 12th November, I castigated Mr Baldwin for failing to deliver on his pledge.This guarantee is that any government in this country, especially the coalition government, which is the present government, will ensure that our air force and power will never be inferior to any country whose attack force can reach our shores.I said: the government has not made up its mind at all, or they have not been able to make the prime minister make up his mind at all.So they have been caught in strange contradictions: to decide without making up their minds, to resolve without making up their minds, to resolutely hesitate, to be steadfastly wavering, to exert all their strength to do nothing.And so we have, month after month, year after year, the locusts devouring those precious hours, perhaps so crucial to British greatness. Mr. Baldwin answered me in a very good speech: I would like to say to this Court in the most candid manner that the differences of opinion between me and Mr. Churchill began in 1933.1931 | 1932 We were in a period of financial crisis, although the Opposition did not accept this formulation.And there is another reason.I would like to remind this House that in my many speeches and on different occasions I have done my best to advance and defend the principles of democracy, and I have said that democracies are always two years behind dictatorships.I believe this statement is true.So it is in this matter.With astonishing candor, I offer my personal views to this Court.As you will recall, the Disarmament Conference was being held in Geneva.You will recall that there was a pacifist mood in the country then perhaps stronger than at any time since the war.You will recall that at the Fulham elections in the autumn of 1933 the Coalition lost a seat by about seven thousand votes, for no other reason than the question of pacifism. Leader, my situation is not easy at all.At that time, the sentiment expressed in the Fulham election was prevailing in the country, and I asked myself at that time what chance, within the next year or two, of changing this sentiment to the view that the country should authorize the government to rearm Woolen cloth?Had I then gone among the people and said that Germany is rearming and therefore we must rearm too, who would have imagined that at that time the peaceful democracies would immediately unite under that summons?From my point of view, I cannot conceive of anything else that would more surely defeat us at the election. This is indeed an astonishing confession.Here his motives were naked, to the point of indecentness.It is indeed unheard of in the history of our parliament that a prime minister should publicly say that he is not doing his job for the security of the country because he is afraid of losing an election.Mr. Baldwin was certainly not motivated by the sordid motive of remaining in office.He really wanted to retire in 1936.He adopted this policy out of fear that Labor, once in power, would do even less than his government would have done.All Labor statements and votes against defense measures are on the record, but this is no excuse for Mr Baldwin's own, and it is especially unfair to the spirit of the British people.His naive admission of a miscalculation of the balance of power in the air last year was a resounding success, but not this time.The whole House was shaken.It made a very bad impression, indeed, and might have dealt a fatal blow to Mr. Baldwin, who was at that time in his decrepit condition, but for the intervention of an accident. At that time there were men in all political parties in England who saw the dangers ahead and were united in demanding practical measures to preserve the security and liberties of our country which were threatened both by totalitarian onslaught and by our government's complacency with the status quo.Our formula is to rearm Great Britain swiftly and on a large scale, with full recognition and exercise of the authority of the League of Nations.I call this policy the policy of equal emphasis on force and the alliance of nations.We all have great contempt for Mr. Baldwin's performance in the House of Commons.The climax of this movement was a meeting in Albert Hall. Many leaders of the various political parties gathered there on December 3rd, among them: the powerful Conservative right, convinced that the country was at stake; the leaders of the League of Nations Peace Vote; Sir Walter Citrine, Chairman of the Unions, was my old rival at the time of the general strike; the Liberal Party and its leader, Sir Archibald Sinclair.By then we had felt that not only were our views starting to be taken seriously, but we were beginning to gain ground.At this moment, the emperor was to marry the woman he loved; this event put everything else to the back of the agenda, and there was an immediate crisis of abdication. As I answered the vote of thanks, someone chanted: Long Live the King, followed by a long cheer.I immediately state my personal position: Another momentous event looms over our minds this evening.In a few minutes we'll be singing God Save the King.I will sing it with the most heartfelt enthusiasm I have sung this song in my life.I hope and pray that irrevocable decisions will not be made hastily, but that time and public opinion will have their will, that the cherished and unique personality of man will not be separated forever from the people he loves. I want Parliament to do its part on these big constitutional issues.I have no doubt that our King will accept the opinions now expressed for the first time by England and the British Empire, and that the English people will not be intolerant of the occupant of the throne. A short but very heated debate ensued, which need not be detailed here.I have known Edward VIII from his boyhood, and in 1910, as Home Secretary, I read at a great assembly a rescript making him Prince of Wales at Caernarfon.I feel that I am obliged to serve him with the highest personal devotion. I never intervened or corresponded with him that summer, although I knew what was going to happen, and now, in his distress, he asked the Prime Minister for permission to consult with me.Mr. Baldwin formally assented; and I went to the King at Belvedere at the first notice.I kept in touch with him until his abdication, and I did my best to entreat the king and the public to be patient and not to make hasty decisions.I have absolutely no regrets about it, really, and there's nothing else I can do about it. The Prime Minister proved himself to be indeed a keen judge of the feelings of the British people.He evidently saw and expressed the strong will of the nation.His abdication was so deftly handled that he rose from the abyss to the pinnacle of the pagoda in two weeks.Several times it seemed that I was the only one who objected to the furious House of Commons.I was not unduly swayed in my actions by hostility; but more than once I could scarcely make my words heard.I once gathered forces under the call of the policy of equal importance to the military and the League of Nations, and regarded myself as the originator of these forces, but now they are falling apart.And I myself have been greatly hit in public opinion, and it is almost generally believed that my political life is finally over.But how strange it is that the same House of Commons, which was so hostile to me, should have been guided and supported by me through the long and arduous years of the war, to the victory of all my enemies!This proves that it is only wise and safe to always follow the decisions of one's conscience. One king abdicates and another ascends the throne.Until the end of May, 1937, in the country and throughout the Empire, the people's minds were full of grand and solemn homage ceremonies and funerals for the new king.Foreign affairs and our national defense have lost their appeal to the public psyche.Our island nation seems thousands of miles away from Europe.On May 18, 1937, the day after the new king took the throne, I received a letter from His Majesty the new king, and now I have permission to record it here. Dear Mr Churchill: I thank you for your very kind letter.I know you have always been, and still are, loyal to my dear brother.I am more moved than words can express by your sympathy and understanding for the difficult problems which have arisen since he left us in December.I am fully aware of the weight of my responsibilities and the burdens of my role as king.I received your letter of blessing, which is a great encouragement to me.You are one of the great statesmen of our country, and a man who served his country so faithfully, and may the goodwill and hope existing at home and in the empire will be a good example to all nations of the world. Please trust me, yours sincerely George (king, emperor) May 18, 1937 In Berkshire, Windsor, Great Gardens, Royal Palace. The influence of my status at that time has been reduced to zero, and I will never forget such a generous expression. Mr Baldwin retired on May 28, 1937, after the accession of King George VI.His long service in office made him a rightful Earl and Order of the Garter.He laid aside the great powers which he had amassed and carefully preserved, but which he had seldom utilized.He departed in an atmosphere of public gratitude and respect.There is no doubt about who will succeed him.Neville Chamberlain, the chancellor of the exchequer, has not only been the main job of the government for the past five years, but he has been one of the most able and powerful ministers.He has outstanding talent and is a famous family in history.When I quoted Shakespeare a year ago at Birmingham, that he was the workhorse of the state, he accepted it as a compliment. I don't expect him to work with me, and I'm afraid it would be unwise for him to do so at this time.His views differed greatly from mine on the great issues of the moment, but I was also pleased to have a fresh and talented executive in power.When he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, he put forward a financial proposal to levy a small amount of defense tax, but it was not accepted by the Conservative Party, and of course he was criticized by the opposition party, which caused trouble.As soon as he became prime minister, I made a speech on the subject, with the aim of removing him from his unbearable situation without compromising his dignity.Our relations, both in business and in private, have always been cold, casual and polite. Mr. Chamberlain made only minor changes to the cabinet.He surprised Mr Cooper by promoting him to the very important post of Lord of the Admiralty, with whom he had previously disagreed on matters of the War Office. Mr Cooper worked in the Foreign Office in his early years.The Prime Minister clearly has no idea what his new Admiralty thinks of the European scene.And it amazes me that Sir Hall, having just secured the large sums required for the naval project, should be willing to leave the Admiralty to become Home Secretary.Hall seems to think that reforming prisons in a broad humanitarian sense will be a fashionable topic in the near future.His family connection with the famous Elizabeth Fry[1] gave him a strong feeling for reforming prisons. [1] Prison reformers in nineteenth-century England.translator I might as well make a comparative evaluation of the two prime ministers, Baldwin and Chamberlain.I have known them for a long time and have worked or will be working under them.Baldwin was a man of greater intellect and understanding, but lacked fine administrative flair.He is not very familiar with foreign affairs and military affairs.He knew very little about Europe, and what he knew did not interest him.But he has a deep understanding of British party politics, and to a large extent he reflects some strengths and many weaknesses of our island nation. He contested five general elections as leader of the Conservative Party, winning three.He's good at waiting things out and keeping his cool under unfavorable criticism.His special ingenuity is to make the situation develop in his favor, and he has the ability to make a decisive decision.He seemed to remind me of what history has left us with about Sir Robert Walpole, certainly without the corruption of the eighteenth century; they both dominated British politics for almost as long. Mr. Neville Chamberlain was an extremely capable, stubborn and self-confident man.Unlike Baldwin, he thought he knew the whole situation in Europe, and even the whole world.Instead of vague but stubborn intuitions, we now have fine-grained efficiencies within the limits of what he believed to be policy.Whether he was Chancellor of the Exchequer or Prime Minister, he strictly controlled military spending. During his tenure, he was the most vocal opponent of all emergency measures.He has clear judgments on all contemporary political figures at home and abroad, and he thinks he is fully capable of dealing with them.His mind was filled with the hope that he would go down in history as a great peacemaker.To this end he was prepared to fight on to the end, regardless of the circumstances, at great danger to himself and his country.It is a pity that he was involved in a torrent whose power was beyond his estimation, and encountered a whirlwind that he did not flinch but could not resist.In the years leading up to the war I thought it would have been easier to work with Baldwin, so far as I knew him, than with Chamberlain; work together. During one day in 1937 I had a meeting with Ribbentrop, the German ambassador to England.In one of the articles I published every two weeks at the time, I mentioned that some of his speeches had been misunderstood.Of course I've seen him in public. Now he's asking if I'd like to see him and talk to him.He received me in a large room above the German embassy.We talked for over two hours.Ribbentrop received me very politely.We talk about the big picture in Europe, including armaments and policy issues.What he said to me was mainly that Germany was seeking the friendship of England (as we are still often called England on the Continent).He said he would have been German Foreign Minister, but he asked Hitler to let him come to London to give details for the Anglo-German Entente and even the Anglo-German Alliance.Germany will preserve the greatness and vastness of the British Empire.They might have demanded the return of the German colonies, but that was clearly irrelevant.All Germany needed was for Britain not to interfere with its expansion into Eastern Europe.It had to find space for its growing population, so it had to annex Poland and the Danzig corridor.Belarus and Ukraine are essential to the future survival of Germany with a population of 70 million.Those who ask the Commonwealth of Britain and the Empire just don't intervene.There was a large map on the wall, and the ambassador led me several times to it to explain his plans. Immediately after I heard these words, I said that I was certain that the British Government would not leave Germany free to act in Eastern Europe.我們同蘇聯的關係的確很不好，我們和希特勒一樣憎恨共產主義，但他也許知道得很清楚，即使保住了法國，英國也不至於對大陸命運如此漠不關心，以致任由德國取得中歐和東歐的霸權。當我說這句話的時候，我們正站在地圖前面，里賓特洛甫突然轉身走開。然後他說：要是這樣，戰爭就不可避免了。沒有別的出路了。 元首已下了決心。沒有什麼能阻止他，也沒有什麼能阻止我們。於是我們回到椅子旁坐下來，那時我不過是個普通議員，只是有些名望罷了。我當時認為我應該對德國大使說事實上我很清楚地記得我說：你講到戰爭，當然這將是全面的戰爭嘍。你不要低估英國。它是一個很奇怪的國家，外國人很少能夠了解它的思想。不要以現在執政的政府的態度來評判它。一旦有一種偉大的事業呈現在英國人民之前，這個政府和不列顛民族就會採取意料不到的行動。我重複說：不要低估英國。它是很聰明的。如果你們使我們被迫投入另一次大戰，英國就會帶動整個世界來反對你們，就像上次大戰那樣。說到這裡，大使激動地站起來，說道：啊！英格蘭可能是很聰明的，可是這一次它不會帶動全世界來反對德國的。我們把話題轉到輕鬆的事情上，隨後就沒有發生什麼可記錄的事情了。這一次談話一直留在我的記憶之中。因為當時我向外交部作了匯報，我覺得可以在這裡記下來。 後來當里賓特洛甫接受征服者對他一生的審判時，他竟肆意歪曲這次談話，還要求傳我去作證。如果我真的被傳去作證的話，那麼我說的就只是現在所寫的這些話了。