Introduction aux guerres européennes

Bernard Owen

L’Empire Russe représentant le christianisme   orthodoxe si longtemps considéré comme étant son défenseur contre tout empiétement  musulman. Cela déplut à Napoléon III qui disposait de zouaves bien formés,  équipés de fusils modernes. Une  entente étant impossible   les zouaves montèrent à l’assaut et prirent Sébastopol.  et Tolstoï qui était militaire russe fondit en larmes quand il vit le  drapeau français flottant sur la ville. L’amitié franco russe ne pouvait résister à cela  et quand Bismark, chancelier allemand, tendit un piège à la France de Napoléon III le poussant à lui déclarer la guerre. Il savait que jamais l’Empire Russe ne viendrait au secours de Napoléon III. Cela fut la fin de la guerre et de l’Empire de Napoléon III. Il s’agissait d’un manque de prévoyance de l’Empereur français.

En 1870 les allemands furent surpris en voyant après la reddition de la France, la quantité de troupes françaises se trouvant à Sedan, et leur équipement, qui se rendaient sans s’être battus.  L’incompétence des chefs est universelle.

L’autre erreur d’un grand chef apparaît.  Ludendorff à la tête de l’armée allemande  lors de la première guerre mondiale a oublié l’une des premières règles de combat « d’assurer à tout moment de conserver la liaison avec ses arrières ». Les munitions, son ravitaillement. Il fonça sur Paris . La grosse Bertha n’était pas une compensation. Ludendorff resta sur le terrain et conserva le corps de son gendre bien aimé à ses cotés.

Plus tard, l’extrémiste germanique, Hitler imputa la défaite allemande aux troupes elles-mêmes. En Fait, une défaite militaire est plus vraisemblable.

Que valent nos chefs des armées? Nous en sommes aux allemands. Nos allemands politico – militaires ont une réputation que l’on pourrait juger surfaite.

Le cinisme  nous montre des milliers de troupes russes prisonnières en 1940.  Puis pour Stalingrad, on voit souvent les pieds ensanglantées et enfouis dans la neige.

L’on a oublié  la surprise des allemands quand ils reçurent les orgues de Staline ou Katioucha à multiples canons qui se déplaçaient facilement, d’abord sur  des camions russes marque SIS plus sur des camions américains Studebaker. A Stalingrad les nouveaux chars allemands  furent presque   démodé par le char T-34/76  conduits par des homme et des femmes qui les avaient construit. Déjà l’aviation  soviétique prenait  le dessus sur la Luftwaffe. Et  Von Paulus nommé Maréchal fut contrait de se rendre.

L’intelligence militaire  n’est pas récente  même si les  circonstances leur furent très défavorables aux russes. Les japonais ont obtenu l’interdiction de franchir le canal de Suez à la flotte russe du nord par les britanniques.

Les russes font peur non seulement par leur taille mais par leur intelligence. Ils firent s’éloigner Napoléon en utilisant le principe des manœuvres simples et successives. Un pilote me fit survoler la Berezina. Napoléon tient à contrer  l’armée russe mais n’y arriva que très partiellement.

Voici  des extraits du Pacte de non agression entre l’Allemagne Nasi et l’Union Soviétique.

La signature du pacte de non – agression par Molotov–Ribbentrop.

Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was a neutrality pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union signed in Moscow on 23 August 1939 by foreign ministers Joachim von Ribbentrop and Vyacheslav Molotov, respectively.[8] The pact was followed by the German-Soviet Commercial Agreement in February 1940.

The pact delineated the spheres of interest between the two powers, confirmed by the supplementary protocol of the German–Soviet Frontier Treaty amended after the joint invasion of Poland. It remained in force for nearly two years, until the German government of Adolf Hitler ended the pact by launching an attack on the Soviet positions in Eastern Poland during Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941.[2]

The clauses of the Nazi-Soviet Pact provided a written guarantee of non-belligerence by each party towards the other, and a declared commitment that neither government would ally itself to, or aid, an enemy of the other party. In addition to stipulations of non-aggression, the treaty included a secret protocol that divided territories of PolandLithuaniaLatviaEstoniaFinland, and Romania, into German and Soviet « spheres of influence« , anticipating « territorial and political rearrangements » of these countries. Thereafter, Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939. Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin ordered the Soviet invasion of Poland on 17 September, one day after a Soviet-Japanese ceasefire at the Khalkhin Gol came into effect.[9] In November, parts of the Karelia and Salla regions in Finland were annexed by the Soviet Union after the Winter War. This was followed by Soviet annexations of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and parts of Romania (Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, and the Hertza region). Advertised concern about ethnic Ukrainians and Belarusians had been proffered as justification for the Soviet invasion of Poland. Stalin’s invasion of Bukovina in 1940 violated the pact, as it went beyond the Soviet sphere of influence agreed with the Axis.[10]

The territories of Poland annexed by the Soviet Union after the 1939 Nazi-Soviet invasion of Poland remained in the USSR at the end of World War II. The new border was set up along the Curzon Line. Only the region around Białystok and a small part of Galicia east of the San river around Przemyśl were returned to the Polish state from that line. Of all other territories annexed by the USSR in 1939–40, the ones detached from Finland (KareliaPetsamo), Estonia (Ingrian area and Petseri County) and Latvia (Abrene) remain part of the Russian Federation, the successor state of the USSR upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Northern Bukovina, Southern Bessarabia and Hertza remain part of Ukraine.

The existence of the secret protocol was denied by the Soviet government until 1989, when it was finally acknowledged and denounced.[11] Some time later the new Russian nationalists and revisionists including Russian amateur negationist Alexander Dyukov and Nataliya Narotchnitskaya, whose book carried an approving foreword by the Russian foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, described the pact as a necessary measure because of the British and French failure to enter into an anti-fascist pact.[11][12] Vladimir Putin has also defended the pact.[13][14]

By the end of May, drafts were formally presented.[48] In mid-June, the main Tripartite negotiations started.[58]The discussion was focused on potential guarantees to central and east European countries should a German aggression arise.[59] The USSR proposed to consider that a political turn towards Germany by the Baltic stateswould constitute an « indirect aggression » towards the Soviet Union.[60] Britain opposed such proposals, because they feared the Soviets’ proposed language could justify a Soviet intervention in Finland and the Baltic states, or push those countries to seek closer relations with Germany.[61][62] The discussion about a definition of « indirect aggression » became one of the sticking points between the parties, and by mid-July, the tripartite political negotiations effectively stalled, while the parties agreed to start negotiations on a military agreement, which the Soviets insisted must be entered into simultaneously with any political agreement.[63]

« The Prussian Tribute in Moscow » in the Polish satirical newspaper Mucha of September 8, 1939.

Beginning of secret talks

From April to July, Soviet and German officials made statements regarding the potential for the beginning of political negotiations, while no actual negotiations took place during that time period.[64] The ensuing discussion of a potential political deal between Germany and the Soviet Union had to be channeled into the framework of economic negotiations between the two countries, because close military and diplomatic connections, as was the case before the mid-1930s, had been largely severed.[65] In May, Stalin replaced his Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov, who was regarded as pro-western[clarification needed] and who was also Jewish, with Vyacheslav Molotov, allowing the Soviet Union more latitude in discussions with more parties, not only with Britain and France.[66]

In late July and early August 1939, Soviet and German officials agreed on most of the details for a planned economic agreement,[67] and specifically addressed a potential political agreement,[68][69][70][c] which the Soviets stated could only come after an economic agreement.[72]

 

…, British, French, and Soviet negotiators scheduled three-party talks on military matters to occur in Moscow in August 1939, aiming to define what the agreement would specify should be the reaction of the three powers to a German attack.[61] The tripartite military talks, started in mid-August, hit a sticking point regarding the passage of Soviet troops through Poland if Germans attacked, and the parties waited as British and French officials overseas pressured Polish officials to agree to such terms.[77][78] Polish officials refused to allow Soviet troops into Polish territory if Germany attacked; Polish foreign minister Józef Beck pointed out that the Polish government feared that once the Red Army entered their territory, it might never leave.[79][80]

On August 19, the 1939 German–Soviet Commercial Agreement was finally signed.[81] On 21 August, the Soviets suspended the tripartite military talks, citing other reasons.[49][82] That same day, Stalin received assurance that Germany would approve secret protocols to the proposed non-aggression pact that would place half of Poland (east of the Vistula river), LatviaEstoniaFinland, and Bessarabia in the Soviets’ sphere of influence.[83] That night, Stalin replied that the Soviets were willing to sign the pact and that he would receive Ribbentrop on 23 August.[84]

The secret protocol

On 22 August, one day after the talks broke down with France and Britain, Moscow revealed that Ribbentrop would visit Stalin the next day. This happened while the Soviets were still negotiating with the British and French missions in Moscow. With the Western nations unwilling to accede to Soviet demands, Stalin instead entered a secret Nazi–Soviet pact.[85] On 24 August a 10-year non-aggression pact was signed with provisions that included: consultation, arbitration if either party disagreed, neutrality if either went to war against a third power, no membership of a group « which is directly or indirectly aimed at the other ». The article « On Soviet–German Relations » in the Soviet newspaper Izvestia of August 21, 1939, stated:

Following completion of the Soviet–German trade and credit agreement, there has arisen the question of improving political links between Germany and the USSR.[86]

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact

Last page of the Additional Secret Protocol of the Pact

There was also a secret protocol to the pact, revealed only after Germany’s defeat in 1945,[87] although hints about its provisions were leaked much earlier, e.g., to influence Lithuania.[88] According to the protocol, Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland were divided into German and Soviet « spheres of influence« .[87] In the north, Finland, Estonia and Latvia were assigned to the Soviet sphere.[87]Poland was to be partitioned in the event of its « political rearrangement »: the areas east of the PisaNarevVistula and San rivers would go to the Soviet Union, while Germany would occupy the west.[87] Lithuania, adjacent to East Prussia, would be in the German sphere of influence, although a second secret protocol agreed to in September 1939 reassigned the majority of Lithuania to the USSR.[89] According to the protocol, Lithuania would be granted its historical capital Vilnius, which was under Polish control during the inter-war period. Another clause of the treaty stipulated that Germany would not interfere with the Soviet Union’s actions towards Bessarabia, then part of Romania; as a result, Bessarabia was joined to the Moldavian ASSR, and become the Moldavian SSR under Moscow’s control.[87]

At the signing, Ribbentrop and Stalin enjoyed warm conversations, exchanged toasts and further addressed the prior hostilities between the countries in the 1930s.[90] They characterized Britain as always attempting to disrupt Soviet–German relations, stated that the Anti-Comintern pact was not aimed at the Soviet Union, but actually aimed at Western democracies and « frightened principally the City of London [i.e., the British financiers] and the English shopkeepers ».[91]

On 24 August, Pravda and Izvestia carried news of the non-secret portions of the Pact, complete with the now infamous front-page picture of Molotov signing the treaty, with a smiling Stalin looking on.[49] The news was met with utter shock and surprise by government leaders and media worldwide, most of whom were aware only of the British–French–Soviet negotiations that had taken place for months.[49] The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was received with shock by Nazi Germany’s allies, notably Japan, by the Comintern and foreign communist parties, and by Jewish communities all around the world.[92] The same day, German diplomat Hans von Herwarth (whose grandmother was Jewish) informed Guido Relli, an Italian diplomat,[93] and American chargé d’affaires Charles Bohlen on the secret protocol regarding vital interests in the countries’ allotted « spheres of influence », without revealing the annexation rights for « territorial and political rearrangement ».[94][95]

Time Magazine repeatedly referred to the Pact as the « Communazi Pact » and its participants as « communazis » until April 1941.[96][97][98][99][100][101][102]

Soviet propaganda and representatives went to great lengths to minimize the importance of the fact that they had opposed and fought against the Nazis in various ways for a decade prior to signing the Pact. Upon signing the pact, Molotov tried to reassure the Germans of his good intentions by commenting to journalists that « fascism is a matter of taste ».[103] For its part, Nazi Germany also did a public volte-face regarding its virulent opposition to the Soviet Union, though Hitler still viewed an attack on the Soviet Union as « inevitable ».[citation needed]

Concerns over the possible existence of a secret protocol were first expressed by the intelligence organizations of the Baltic states[citation needed] scant days after the pact was signed. Speculation grew stronger when Soviet negotiators referred to its content during negotiations for military bases in those countries (see occupation of the Baltic States).

The day after the Pact was signed, the French and British military negotiation delegation urgently requested a meeting with Soviet military negotiator Kliment Voroshilov.[104] On August 25, Voroshilov told them « [i]n view of the changed political situation, no useful purpose can be served in continuing the conversation. »[104] That day, Hitler told the British ambassador to Berlin that the pact with the Soviets prevented Germany from facing a two front war, changing the strategic situation from that in World War I, and that Britain should accept his demands regarding Poland.[105]

On 25 August, surprising Hitler, Britain entered into a defense pact with Poland.[105] Consequently, Hitler postponed his planned 26 August invasion of Poland to 1 September.[105][106] In accordance with the defense pact, Britain and France declared war on Germany on 3 September.[107]

 

 

 

Katyusha rocket launcher

We can watch films about Soviet prisoners during World War II. But this is only part of the story. The multiple rocket laucher used by the Soviet Union astonished Nazi Germany just as the new Soviet tanks did as they were able to destroy the Nazi ones.

Bernard Owen

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

multiple rocket launcher (Russian: Катю́ша; IPA: [kɐˈtʲuʂə] ( listen)) is a type of rocket artilleryfirst built and fielded by the Soviet Union in World War IIMultiple rocket launchers such as these deliver explosives to a target area more quickly than conventional artillery, but with lower accuracy and requiring a longer time to reload. They are fragile compared to artillery guns, but are inexpensive, easy to produce, and usable on any chassis. The Katyushas of World War II, the first self-propelled artillery mass-produced by the Soviet Union,[1] were usually mounted on ordinary trucks. This mobility gave the Katyusha, and other self-propelled artillery, another advantage: being able to deliver a large blow all at once, and then move before being located and attacked with counter-battery fire.

Katyusha weapons of World War II included the BM-13 launcher, light BM-8, and heavy BM-31. Today, the nickname is also applied to newer truck-mounted post-Soviet – in addition to non-Soviet – multiple rocket launchers, notably the common BM-21 Grad and its derivatives.

Nickname

Initially, concerns for secrecy kept the military designation of the Katyushas from being known by the soldiers who operated them. They were called by code names such as Kostikov guns, after the head of the RNII, the Reaction-Engine Scientific Research Institute, and finally classed as Guards Mortars.[2] The name BM-13 was only allowed into secret documents in 1942, and remained classified until after the war.[3]

Because they were marked with the letter K (for Voronezh Komintern Factory),[3] Red Army troops adopted a nickname from Mikhail Isakovsky‘s popular wartime song, « Katyusha« , about a girl longing for her absent beloved, who has gone away on military service.[4] Katyusha is the Russian equivalent of Katie, an endearing diminutiveform of the name Katherine: Yekaterina →Katya →Katyusha.

German troops coined the nickname « Stalin’s organ » (German: Stalinorgel), after Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, comparing the visual resemblance of the launch array to a church organ, and the sound of the weapon’s rocket motors, a distinctive howling sound which terrified the German troops,[5] adding a psychological warfare aspect to their use. Weapons of this type are known by the same name in Denmark (Danish: Stalinorgel), Finland (Finnish: Stalinin urut), France (French: orgue de Staline), Norway (Norwegian: Stalinorgel), the Netherlands and Belgium(Dutch: Stalinorgel), Hungary (Hungarian: Sztálinorgona), Spain and other Spanish-speaking countries (Spanish: Órganos de Stalin) as well as in Sweden (Swedish: Stalinorgel).[4]

The heavy BM-31 launcher was also referred to as Andryusha (Андрюша, an affectionate diminutive of « Andrew »).[6]

World War II

A battery of Katyusha launchers fires at German forces during the Battle of Stalingrad, 6 October 1942.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Katyusha rocket launchers, which were invented in Voronezh, were mounted on many platforms during World War II, including on trucks, artillery tractors, tanks, and armoured trains, as well as on naval and riverine vessels as assault support weapons. Soviet engineers also mounted single Katyusha rockets on lengths of railway track to serve in urban combat.

The design was relatively simple, consisting of racks of parallel rails on which rockets were mounted, with a folding frame to raise the rails to launch position. Each truck had 14 to 48 launchers. The M-13 rocket of the BM-13 system was 80 cm (2 ft 7 in) long, 13.2 cm (5.2 in) in diameter and weighed 42 kg (93 lb).

The weapon is less accurate than conventional artillery guns, but is extremely effective in saturation bombardment, and was particularly feared by German soldiers. A battery of four BM-13 launchers could fire a salvo in 7–10 seconds that delivered 4.35 tons of high explosives over a 400,000-square-metre (4,300,000 sq ft) impact zone,[2] making its power roughly equivalent to that of 72 conventional artillery guns. With an efficient crew, the launchers could redeploy to a new location immediately after firing, denying the enemy the opportunity for counterbattery fire. Katyusha batteries were often massed in very large numbers to create a shock effect on enemy forces. The weapon’s disadvantage was the long time it took to reload a launcher, in contrast to conventional guns which could sustain a continuous low rate of fire.

 

Development

In June 1938, the Soviet Jet Propulsion Research Institute(RNII) in Leningrad was authorized by the Main Artillery Directorate (GAU) to develop a multiple rocket launcher for the RS-132 aircraft rocket (RS for Reaktivnyy Snaryad, ‘rocket-powered shell’). I. Gvay led a design team in Chelyabinsk, Russia, which built several prototype launchers firing the modified 132 mm M-132 rockets over the sides of ZiS-5 trucks. These proved unstable, and V.N. Galkovskiy proposed mounting the launch rails longitudinally. In August 1939, the result was the BM-13 (BM stands for Боевая Mашина(translit. Boyevaya Mashina), ‘combat vehicle’ for M-13 rockets).[1]

The first large-scale testing of the rocket launchers took place at the end of 1938, when 233 rounds of various types were used. A salvo of rockets could completely straddle a target at a range of 5,500 metres (3.4 mi). But the artillery branch was not fond of the Katyusha, because it took up to 50 minutes to load and fire 24 rounds, while a conventional howitzer could fire 95 to 150 rounds in the same time.[citation needed] Testing with various rockets was conducted through 1940, and the BM-13-16 with launch rails for sixteen rockets was authorized for production. Only forty launchers were built before Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941.[4]

After their success in the first month of the war, mass production was ordered and the development of other models proceeded. The Katyusha was inexpensive and could be manufactured in light industrial installations which did not have the heavy equipment to build conventional artillery gun barrels.[2] By the end of 1942, 3,237 Katyusha launchers of all types had been built, and by the end of the war total production reached about 10,000.[7]

The truck-mounted Katyushas were installed on ZiS-6 6×4 trucks, as well as the two-axle ZiS-5 and ZiS-5V. In 1941, a small number of BM-13 launchers were mounted on STZ-5 artillery tractors. A few were also tried on KV tank chassis as the KV-1K, but this was a needless waste of heavy armour. Starting in 1942, they were also mounted on various British, Canadian and U.S. Lend-Lease trucks, in which case they were sometimes referred to as BM-13S. The cross-country performance of the Studebaker US6 2½ ton truck was so good that it became the GAU’s standard mounting in 1943, designated BM-13N (normalizovanniy, ‘standardized’), and more than 1,800 of this model were manufactured by the end of World War II.[8] After World War II, BM-13s were based on Soviet-built ZiL-151 trucks.

The 82 mm BM-8 was approved in August 1941, and deployed as the BM-8-36 on truck beds and BM-8-24 on T-40 and T-60 light tank chassis. Later these were also installed on GAZ-67 jeeps as the BM-8-8, and on the larger Studebaker trucks as the BM-8-48.[2] In 1942, the team of scientists Leonid Shvarts, Moisei Komissarchik and engineer Yakov Shor received the Stalin prize for the development of the BM-8-48.[9][10]

Based on the M-13, the M-30 rocket was developed in 1942. Its bulbous warhead required it to be fired from a grounded frame, called the M-30 (single frame, four round; later double frame, 8 round), instead of a launch rail mounted on a truck. In 1944 it became the basis for the BM-31-12 truck-mounted launcher.[2]

A battery of BM-13-16 launchers included four firing vehicles, two reload trucks and two technical support trucks, with each firing vehicle having a crew of six. Reloading was executed in 3–4 minutes, although the standard procedure was to switch to a new position some 10 km away due to the ease with which the battery could be identified by the enemy. Three batteries were combined into a division (company), and three divisions into a separate mine-firing regiment of rocket artillery.

Combat history

The multiple rocket launchers were top secret in the beginning of World War II. A special unit of the NKVD troops was raised to operate them.[2] On July 14, 1941, an experimental artillery battery of seven launchers was first used in battle at Orsha in Vitebsk Province of USSR(Belarus, under the command of Captain Ivan Flyorov, destroying a concentration of German troops with tanks, armored vehicles and trucks at the marketplace, causing massive German Army casualties and its retreat from the town in panic. Following the success, the Red Army organized new Guards mortar batteries for the support of infantry divisions. A battery’s complement was standardized at four launchers. They remained under NKVD control until German Nebelwerfer rocket launchers became common later in the war.[7]

On August 8, 1941, Stalin ordered the formation of eight special Guards mortar regiments under the direct control of the General Headquarters Reserve (Stavka-VGK). Each regiment comprised three battalions of three batteries, totalling 36 BM-13 or BM-8 launchers. Independent Guards mortar battalions were also formed, comprising 12 launchers in three batteries of four. By the end of 1941, there were eight regiments, 35 independent battalions, and two independent batteries in service, fielding a total of 554 launchers.[14]

In June 1942 heavy Guards mortar battalions were formed around the new M-30 static rocket launch frames, consisting of 96 launchers in three batteries. In July, a battalion of BM-13s was added to the establishment of a tank corps.[15] In 1944, the BM-31 was used in motorized heavy Guards mortar battalions of 48 launchers. In 1943, Guards mortar brigades, and later divisions, were formed equipped with static launchers.[14]

By the end of 1942, 57 regiments were in service—together with the smaller independent battalions, this was the equivalent of 216 batteries: 21% BM-8 light launchers, 56% BM-13, and 23% M-30 heavy launchers. By the end of the war, the equivalent of 518 batteries were in service.[14]

Post-war development

 

Russian forces use BM-27 rocket launchers during the Second Chechen War

The success and economy of multiple rocket launchers (MRL) have led them to continue to be developed. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union fielded several models of Katyusha-like MRL, notably the BM-21launchers somewhat inspired by the earlier weapon, and the larger BM-27. Advances in artillery munitions have been applied to some Katyusha-type multiple launch rocket systems, including bomblet submunitions, remotely deployed land mines, and chemical warheads.

 

L’Espagne, Barcelone: Mais qui parle du mode de scrutin?

Maria Rodriguez-McKey

Les partis indépendantistes sont très populaires en Europe. Il y a en Espagne, au pays Basque et en Catalogne, ce dernier nous ayant donné un exemple hier de ce qu’il veut, mais il y en a en Belgique les Wallons. Aux Etats-Unis il y en aussi. Par exemple, le Vermont un joli petit Etat de la Nouvelle Angleterre. L’Etat des montagnes  vertes qui partage le lac Champlain (fondateur de la colonie française du Canada, le Québec) avec son voisin à l’ouest New York.  Le parti indépendantiste voudrait créer ma deuxième république du Vermont et un réunification avec un Québec libre lui aussi. La version californienne veut la séparation de la Californie du sud de celle du Nord. En Hawaï trois partis indépendantistes!

Mais quelle est la différence de poids entres les partis indépendantistes européens et leurs homologues américains?   Les américains ne gagnent pas des élections par ce que le scrutin majoritaire à un seul tour crée un bipartisme qui dure depuis très longtemps pour toutes les élections américaines ce qui fait qu’un tiers partis ne peut percé soudainement pour et mettre à mal un système de partis.

Les partis extrémistes sont le lot quotidien de l’Europe. Parfois, comme en Espagne, Belgique ou la Corse, ils s sont indépendantistes reflétant les divisions crée parfois par l’histoire mais consolidées par le mode de scrutin. Dans d’autres pays c’est les partis populistes d’extrême droite. Ces partis peuvent prendre différentes idéologies, toujours extrêmes pour pouvoir se distinguer des autres, mais ils déstabilisent toujours le système de partis.

Pour conclure: Alors que les 135 députés au parlement Catalan sont élus à la proportionnelle aux Etats-Unis le Congrès ainsi que les parlements de chacun de 50 Etats le sont au scrutin majoritaire à un tour.

Voici un article concernant certains événements tragiques de l’Espagne pouvant mener à des conséquences Européennes.

Espagne, monarchie, république,

la guerre des mots

Bernard Owen

Lors de l’abdication du roi d’Espagne, la télévision nous a montré une vue d’ensemble de la foule rassemblée Place Mayor de Madrid chantant des slogans anti-monarchiques. La télévision s’est alors rapprochée d’une des participantes, qui a dit haut et fort « nous voulons être des citoyens ». Cet événement nous a menés à faire quelques remarques.
• Vivre dans une république ou dans le cadre d’une monarchie constitutionnelle (comme en Espagne) représente sur le terrain de la démocratie la même chose, et le mot « citoyen » n’est qu’un mot, alors que la politique ne repose pas que sur des mots.
• L’Espagne a déjà été une République. La deuxième République a été décidée à partir des élections municipales du 12 avril 1931. La coalition anti-monarchique n’obtient pas la majorité sur l’ensemble des territoires (seulement 40 % des suffrages), mais elle se trouve à la première place dans les grandes villes. Il y eut des mouvements de rue à Madrid, et le roi Alphonse XIII, craignant des troubles et ne souhaitant pas conserver son trône au prix d’une guerre civile et d’un bain de sang, mal conseillé par ses proches, partit volontairement en exil, mais en oubliant la procédure habituelle de l’abdication.
La proclamation de la République, qui eut lieu deux jours après les élections, fut reconnue par la papauté, l’armée ainsi que par de nombreuses autorités politiques et intellectuelles.
Au cours de cette deuxième République, nous trouvons trois élections. La première en 1931 donne la victoire à la gauche. Elle crée l’Institut de la réforme agraire, qui s’enfonce dans des complexités juridiques.
Un autre point de la plus grande importance est le fait des erreurs que peuvent commettre les stratèges politiques. La gauche au pouvoir pense être en mesure de remporter les prochaines élections et décide de modifier la loi électorale pour amplifier la victoire en sièges de la tendance qui vient en tête des suffrages obtenus. Le gouvernement se base sur la loi Acerbo de Mussolini, qui, conçue 8 ans plus tôt, convient parfaitement à cette volonté.
La prévision du gouvernement, à savoir qu’il remporterait les prochaines élections, s’avère être fausse, et la droite remporte largement les législatives de 1933, grâce à cette nouvelle loi électorale. La droite au pouvoir ne donna pas l’image d’une entente exemplaire. Le parti de droite (CEDA) qui avait obtenu le plus de députés (115) aux Cortes ne fait pas partie du gouvernement, ceci fit mauvaise impression. Les conflits sociaux, dès 1934, se multiplièrent, alors que l’Espagne connaissait une production en hausse avec, de surcroit, d’ excellentes récoltes céréalières et un recul du chômage.
Fin 1934, des insurrections socialistes et anarchistes ont lieu dans plus de vingt provinces. En parallèle, la phalange espagnole se développe. Le gouvernement pense qu’une élection anticipée peut entraîner une majorité de centre droit.
Les élections du 6 février 1936 sont un autre exemple des erreurs d’appréciation des hommes politiques. La gauche remporte les élections avec une très faible marge au niveau des suffrages, mais très importante au niveau des sièges.
Grâce à leur implantation syndicale, dans le pays, les anarchistes représentaient une force égale aux socialistes et aux communistes. A droite, la phalange n’obtient aucun siège. Après la victoire de la gauche, celle-ci fait la même erreur que la droite en 1933. Le Parti Socialiste, le plus important de la gauche à l’assemblée (99 sièges) n’est pas au gouvernement.
L’insurrection d’une partie de l’armée, finalement prise en main par Franco, fait penser à la première République, qui ne dura que de 1873 à 1875, mise à mal par la notion d’indépendance, ou simplement d’autonomie, qui pénétra jusqu’à de simples villages et aboutit à la révolution cantonale !
Revenons à 1936 – 1937
Il existe une région très mouvementée qui mérite quelque attention. Il s’agit de la Catalogne. Les principaux évènements sont relatés ici :
Dès juillet 1936, la Catalogne et Barcelone se trouvent sous le contrôle des milices ouvrières.
Les syndicats anarchistes CNT se joignent au président de la généralité : Luis Companys. Ils forment le CCMA (Comité Central des Milices Antifascistes de Catalogne ), qui exerce les fonctions d’un gouvernement de Catalogne.Collectivisation des industries. La tendance s’étend à l’Aragon.
Le gouvernement républicain de Madrid est impuissant.
Climat de méfiance entre les institutions républicaines et les organisations ouvrières.
Le gouvernement de Madrid se retire à Valence, qui devient la capitale de l’Espagne.
Le bras droit de Companys tente de mettre de l’ordre dans les actes des patrouilles armées.
De violents affrontements entre le corps des douaniers et les patrouilles, qui se terminent à l’avantage des premiers. L’on craignait alors qu’une guerre ouverte éclate dans les villes du Nord de la Catalogne entre les anarchistes, le gouvernement, et les communistes .
Chaque camp constitue des dépôts d’armes et fortifie en secret ses édifices. A Barcelone c’est le chaos.
La Centrale téléphonique était occupée légalement par la CNT depuis le début de la guerre.
Le 2 mai, le ministre de la marine et de l’air du gouvernement de Valence voulut téléphoner à la généralité de Catalogne. Cette conversation et d’autres furent interrompues par la standardiste qui leur dit que les lignes devaient être utilisées à des fins plus importantes.
Un corps de 200 policiers commandés par le conseiller de l’ordre public de la généralité se rendit au central téléphonique. La CNT ouvrit le feu. La place de Catalogne se couvre de monde, l’on sort les armes et l’on érige des barricades.
Le 4 mai, le calme revient, mais les milices anarchiques attaquent les édifices gouvernementaux de la Catalogne. Les dirigeants des diverses factions lancent des appels au calme.
Le 5 mai, le Président Companys nomme des membres du gouvernement catalan pour négocier le cessé le feu, mais des tirs incontrôlés abattent les passants.
Le 6 mai, l’on tire au mortier.
A ce moment, 5000 hommes commandés par un colonel anarchiste sur ordre du gouvernement républicain quittent Madrid et Valence pour Barcelone pour rétablir l’ordre. Dans la nuit, trois vaisseaux de guerre républicains transportant des troupes atteignent Barcelone.
Le 7 mai, ces troupes arrivent à Barcelone et occupent plusieurs points stratégiques et désarment les miliciens.
Le 8 mai 1937, les rues sont tranquilles et les barricades démontées.
Les Républiques espagnoles nous présentent la guerre des mots. Les anarchistes voulaient faire la révolution pour gagner la guerre, alors que les communistes voulaient gagner la guerre pour faire la révolution. 4 ministres anarchiques étaient au gouvernement en novembre 1936. Nos amis anarchistes en discutent encore.

From the ashes of the Civil War to a titanic armored force

The « Russky Reno »

Was the very first Russian tank, a copy of a White Russian Renault FT captured in 1918. It was completely disassembled, studied and reproduced by workers of the factory “Red Sormovo” in 1920. It took the name “Comrade Lenin, The Freedom Fighter”. But the lack of manpower, resources, largely obsolete tooling and devastated infrastructure resulting from four years of relentless civil war delayed the introduction of the first proper Russian tank by six years.

This first vehicle was the T-18, derived from prototypes based on the FT. Its official designation was Maliy Soprovozhdeniya, Perviy (Small Support Vehicle Number 1), which is why it was also known as MS-1. It was produced from 1928 to 1931, armed with a 37 mm (1.46 in) and a machine-gun. 960 were built, used later for training. They saw little action before being phased out, while only a handful rearmed with a 45 mm (1.77 in) gun soldiered during the summer of 1941. The next one, the T-19, was an improved version, which never came into full production. The British Vickers Mark E was replicated instead, as the T-26. The British tank, bought in 1931, was a revelation for Soviet engineers and was immediately copied. After the initial series, armed with low velocity guns, with limited armor and relatively weak engine, the model was completely redesigned, emerging as the model 1933 T-26. This led to the biggest peacetime tank production ever, with 10,600 built and an impressive number of variants. It was widely exported and fought throughout the world, before and during the first stages of WW2.

The T-24 was the first true Soviet medium tank. Only 25 were produced by the Kharkov Locomotive Factory (KhPZ) in Ukraine. Armed with a 45 mm (1.77 in) gun and three machine-guns, with one mounted in small turret on top of the main one, it was essentially an enlarged T-18 (18.5 tons), with a slightly reworked suspension. Although the project was dropped in 1931, the suspension was kept for the highly successful Komintern artillery tractor (2000 built) and Voroshilovets heavy artillery tractor (230). This project helped form a team that would prove successful later on.

The T-27 tankette was greatly inspired by the Carden-Loyd Mk.VI. The local version was larger, but still light enough to fulfill typical tankette duties, such as reconnaissance and supply. “Airborne armored support” tests included tankettes and amphibious light tanks like the T-38. A few of the 2700 originally produced still served actively in the summer of 1941.

The T-19 was a light tank designed in 1929 by engineer Semyon Alexandrovich Ginzburg to fulfill multiple and contradictory specifications from the RKKA (Workers and Peasants Red Army). The requirements were changed many times, even during trials, and further complicated the delivery of a suitable preseries vehicle. It had to be fully gas-proof and amphibious, fast, well armored and armed, and easy to manufacture as well. The project was eventually dropped in favor of a licence-built version of the Vickers 6-ton.

Inspection of T-34s and crews, before departing for the front. With bigger industrial capabilities, huge forced manpower and a more pragmatic way to build tanks, the Red Army overwhelmed the Wehrmacht, despite their superior tanks and tactics.

All variants of the T-16 and T-18, the first Soviet tank that entered mass-production.

The T-26, the most widely produced tank of the thirties. It was the most successful derivative of the British Vickers 6-ton (Mark E).

The BT-2 on trials. The BT series (Bystrokhodny Tank meaning “fast tank”) was directly based on the Walter Christie’s “race tank”. This was a convertible machine, which could travel on paved roads on its wheels only, without tracks. The Soviets bought two Christie M1931 and the license to produce them. Soon after, they derived the BT-1 prototype, BT-2 and BT-3 pre-series, and mass-produced the BT-5 and BT-7. These were the fastest tanks in service in 1939, as the BT-2 was capable of 100 km/h (62 mph). It suited the Soviet “deep battle” doctrine and around 6000 machines were produced.

The T-28 was the standard medium “infantry tank”. It was typical of the late thirties, with its sluggishness, heavy armor and multiple turrets. It took a strong influence from the Vickers A1E1 Independent, and was produced from 1933 to 1941. By then, it was completely obsolete.

The BT-7 cavalry tank was derived from the Christie design. It was fast, but still lacking protection and firepower, at least compared to the standards of 1941. It was then the second most common Soviet tank besides the T-26 and played an instrumental part in the victories at Khalkin-Gol against the IJA.

The BT-7M was the last version of the Soviet cruiser tanks, upgraded in many ways. The biggest change came from the engine, derived from a diesel already tested on the experimental BT-8. The transmission, gearbox, tracks and drive sprockets were also changed, and in 1941 the protection was increased.

For the BT series, protection and firepower were sacrificed. In 1939-40, new designs reversed this trend and, through the A-20 and A-32, created a brand new breed of “cruisers” turned into true medium tanks. These were the direct precursors of the legendary T-34.

The T-34/76 was the most successful Soviet tank of the war. It came from a long series of cruiser tanks. The 1st pre-series vehicle is pictured here. In 1941, it was superior to any German design, successfully covering the very difficult “magic triangle” (protection, mobility, firepower), with the bonus of easy mass-production.
The T-34/85, a 1943 version of the legendary T-34, the most produced and widely used tank of WWII. This tank greatly contributed to the victory achieved by the Red Army. It was pivotal in all offensives, still sporting decent speed and protection, along with an upgraded armament and many mass-production improvements.

The Soviet KV-1 was named after “Kliment Voroshilov”, a famous Soviet defense minister. It became as famous as the T-34 because of its strong armor. 5220 were built from 1939 to 1943. It was the mainstay of the Soviet heavy tank units until 1944.

The KV-1S was a late attempt (fall 1942) to bring back some mobility to the KV-1, while sacrificing some armor and introducing a brand new, lighter cast turret. A few were built, but their development paved the way for the more ambitious KV-85.
The KV-85 was a hybrid, transitional model built in small numbers. It was originally the KV-85G, which was meant to feature a modified KV-1S turret with an 85 mm (3.35 in) gun jammed inside, and would have made a horrible stopgap. The KV-85G almost entered production, but trials of the IS-85 turret on a KV-1S chassis took place, and this trial variant was accepted into stopgap production as the KV-85.

Soviet IS-1

The IS-1 lacked firepower against the Tiger, so the engineers managed to equip the largely remodelled hull and turret with a massive 122 mm (4.8 in) gun, re-designating the vehicle as the IS-2. Although reaching a new level in raw firepower, the new gun was slow to reload and it could only carry a limited number of shells. Nevertheless, it gave new confidence to the crews which could have a fighting chance against the best German tanks.

The Iosif Stalin 3 was the last of the wartime heavy tanks series.


Iosif Stalin

It was only entering service when Berlin fell. The turret inspired later Cold War designs. The series continued on until the death of Stalin in 1953. The last was the IS-10 (T-10 after 1953), which came after the prototypes IS-6 and IS-7, and the postwar IS-4 (only 250 built).