The Second World War (Barbero) PDF

## The Second World War The 1930s began with a deep economic crisis and ended with the most widespread and destructive war that the world had experienced until then. In its course, a sharp ideological conflict was activated, in which one of the parties opted to seek its resolution through war with...

## The Second World War The 1930s began with a deep economic crisis and ended with the most widespread and destructive war that the world had experienced until then. In its course, a sharp ideological conflict was activated, in which one of the parties opted to seek its resolution through war with all the implications that such a decision entailed. Unlike what happened in 1914-1918, the confrontation involved extra-European countries and scenarios, but also included, as a unique and distinctive feature, a racist component that led to a massacre in Germany and other territories conquered by the Nazis, a situation that did not fall within the "logic" of war. On the other hand, HITLER's decisions in relation to the Soviet Union and Japan's attack on the United States resulted in an unthinkable alliance shortly before, which had enormous repercussions from the moment the course of the war began to reverse. In effect, the debacle experienced by the Nazis in Russia was the starting point for the advance of the Red Army over territories of Eastern Europe and the subsequent formation of a socialist bloc controlled by the Soviet Union, a real challenge for the West. The United States, in turn, had a much more active and prolonged intervention than had occurred during World War I, a situation that was maintained during the postwar period, contributing to avoiding a repetition of the mistakes that prevented political life from stabilizing in 1919. Precisely, the American renunciation of returning to its traditional isolation led quickly to a confrontation with the Soviet Union, in what almost immediately was called the "Cold War". ### Economic Elements of Military Decisions The invasion of Poland by the German army in September 1939 was the culmination of a process in which HITLER's aggressive strategy was exhausting the possibilities of maintaining peace on the continent, despite the ostensible policy of appeasement attempted by Great Britain. For this reason, in Germany fundamentally, but also in other countries, there was prior preparation, which had its beginning in HITLER's seizure of power and, above all, in the orientation towards rearmament that his government carried out from 1936. As a result of the entire process, the German dominance in Europe by 1939 was greater than in 1914; in addition to the recovery of the Saar (1935) and part of Poland, Austria came under Nazi control in 1938, and the Czechoslovakian region of the Sudetenland the following year. Therefore, the Reich's population was 90 million people, its product per capita higher and its unemployment rate lower than in any other European country. While it is not easy to separate military spending from other spending related to the formation of social capital, MILWARD rightly asks: Is a road network a preparation for war? Estimates have been made of the military spending of the main powers involved during the period 1933-1938 (Table 1). | Country | Military Spending (in millions of pounds sterling) | |---|---| | Germany | 2,868 | | Russia | 2,808 | | Japan | 1,266 | | Great Britain | 1,200 | | United States | 1,175 | | France |1,088 | | Italy | 930 | These figures show the importance of the Nazi decision, but they have also led to the assertion with consistent elements that war priorities, while significant, did not come to the fore in a decisive way. On the other hand, the preparation was guided by HITLER's strategy regarding how to approach the war, which was defined in one word: Blitzkrieg ("lightning war"). Beyond the tactical meaning of a short campaign, designed to crush enemy resistance in a short time, the idea of \t the Blitzkrieg implied that the economy was not required beyond what was demanded of it in peacetime. That is why, from September 1939, there was no radical reorientation of the German economy. This option, which remained until early 1942, when the German army was halted in Russian territory, gave its imprint to the war and marked the characteristics of the German economic effort. The weapons needed to carry out the Blitzkrieg were of such a type as to allow the development of an agile and rapid campaign, so that the enemy would not have time to achieve a comparable level of equipment. The key was the manufacture of tanks, aircraft and other vehicles, and the production of synthetic materials that would replace imports that were difficult to access. Against this position adopted by the Germans, the British adopted a defensive strategy, which was based on long-term naval and air rearmament, based on the conviction that they had to resist and assert their productive capacity and the possibility of obtaining supplies from the entire world in a protracted war. This means that the strategic decisions of the main contenders determined how to approach the war economically. Now, by the end of 1943, the world economy was more mobilized for war than in 1914-1918. Both state economic planning and control over economic resources, as well as the proportion of the product dedicated to military purposes, were higher than in the previous conflict. Although concentrated in a few countries, at the peak of activity, more than a third of the world's net product was dedicated to the war. Everywhere, the war effort was bolstered by increased production, reduced consumption and maximum utilization of available fixed capital. ### The War Effort of the Allies During the war, world production grew between 15 and 20%, but there were major differences between countries. No nation experienced such rapid expansion as the United States. Table 2 shows the evolution of gross domestic product during the period. | Country | 1939 | 1940 | 1941 | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | 1945 | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | United States | 100 | 108 | 127 | 153 | 198 | 183 | 191 | | Great Britain | 100 | 110 | 120 | 123 | 126 | 121 | 115 | | Germany | 100 | 101 | 107 | 109 | 111 | 114 | 80 | | France | 100 | 82 | 65 | 58 | 55 | 47 | 51 | While in World War I, US industrial production grew at an annual rate of 7%, between 1940 and 1944 it did so at a rate of over 15%. This expansion was due to an increase in employment - 19 million jobs were created between 1941 and 1945 - a preferential shift of resources to industry, and a constellation of factors that include economies of scale, the introduction of new production methods, and incentives for labor. *All industries benefited*, but those related *to war did so to a greater extent*, to the point that in 1944 armaments production was almost 40% of the world total. In contrast, *consumer goods industries had modest growth or did not grow at all.* The expansion contributed to the progress of industrialization in new areas of the south and east of the country, boosting the movement of agricultural labor to cities. However, the general improvement in the economy did not reach all sectors: the large corporations were the main beneficiaries of the war contracts, while small and medium-sized businesses were marginalized from the situation of prosperity, which consequently activated the industrial concentration process. Embarked on the war since December 1941, the Democratic government of the United States was increasing its powers of control over the war effort; numerous committees and state organizations were replacing those that had emerged during the New Deal. Through them, the population was mobilized to channel their efforts based on the needs of the war. The British economy did not have a performance similar to that of the United States, a circumstance evidenced by Table 2. The policy implemented by the government was affirmed in the concept of "total war", so that resources were quickly diverted towards military objectives. State intervention deepened noticeably. There was rationing, control over civilian activities - which included, for example, the elimination of private car use, government distribution of raw materials, and reorientation of labor towards activities related to the war. The repercussions of the conflict on the economy were profound and varied. On the plus side, it can be pointed out that there was a strong increase in state and private investment in the aircraft industry, machine tools and automobiles, which had a positive impact on development in the postwar period. On the minus side, it can be mentioned that the government went so far as to use almost half of the national product for military purposes, which resulted in a decrease in civilian consumption on the order of 20% in 1943 compared to 1939 levels. On the other hand, the shift of efforts towards military purposes affected the country's export capacity. This situation of trade imbalance was resolved through a negotiation with the United States that allowed the country to obtain raw materials, food and weapons for free during the war. The methods of financing the war were heavily influenced by KEYNES' recommendations, who in a work published in 1940 entitled How to Pay for the Cost of the War, had highlighted the need for a policy of low long-term interest rates and stable prices through the granting of subsidies. The maintenance of a 3% interest rate throughout the war period allowed the country to contract a reasonable level of public debt that facilitated the reconstruction process. ### Germany Facing The War German economic policy in relation to the war can be divided into two periods: the Blitzkrieg period up to the winter of 1941-1942, and the period of accelerated production, which lasted until the end of the conflict. During the Blitzkrieg stage, German economic efforts were very limited. The same aimed at breaking the enemy army by paralyzing it, cutting off supply and communication lines in favor of mass use of tanks and bombers. With this strategy, almost all of Europe was conquered, maintaining without significant variations the production of consumer goods and armaments. The slogan of those years was: "a war economy as close as possible to a peacetime economy." The Soviet counterattacks from late 1941 and the entry into war of the United States led HITLER to decide to abandon the Blitzkrieg. From early 1942, ALBERT SPEER's management as Minister of Armaments focused efforts on an increase in munitions production, which tripled between 1942 and 1944, demonstrating the resources that Germany still had. In the last year of the war, there was the greatest growth in manufacturing capacity, which was geared towards mass production, since the needs of recruitment were absorbing skilled labor, forcing quality to be replaced by quantity. It became increasingly evident in that last year the impact of air raids on the functioning of the economy, affecting communications and hitting the industrial structure hard. One of the most relevant issues in relation to German economic policy during the war period is the exploitation of the occupied territories. The proclaimed Nazi project of creating a New Order did not materialize effectively, being limited to the extraction of resources for the benefit of Germany, without any consideration for the interests of other countries. At first, payments from them partially replaced loans; but in addition, their contribution in goods and services to Germany's gross output has been estimated at 14%, a high percentage, but which could have been even higher if efforts had been made to try to capture the population of the countries under their control. ### The Soviet Economy and The War The Soviet Union found itself facing the war in a moment when industrialization, although accelerated, had not yet been completed, while the backwardness of agriculture and the very low levels of consumption were also clearly visible. Furthermore, after the German-Soviet pact, STALIN believed, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that the German offensive had been diverted in another direction. That is why commercial deliveries to Germany continued until the Nazi invasion materialized, and the third five-year plan, although modified to achieve some war production objectives, did not take into account a possible confrontation with the Third Reich. The Soviet Union was subjected to an enormous effort at a time when the margin for sacrifice was much smaller than that of the rest of the warring states. The statistics available (Table 3) show that the Soviet Union had to face the war situation with declining gross output and industrial resources cut compared to pre-war levels. | Indicator | 1940 | 1941 | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | National Income | 100 | 92 | 66 | 74 | 88 | | Industrial Production | 100 | 90 | 104 | 140 | 186 | | Armament Industry | 100 | 77 | 100 | 186 | 224 | | Agricultural Production | 100 | 62 | 38 | 37 | 54 | In short, the Soviet Union was able to withstand the German invasion and its army from 1942 onwards launched a counteroffensive that allowed it to advance over Eastern European territory, but at the extremely high cost of a ruined economy, in which only war production was growing, and of a population burdened by deprivation. ### The Second World War and The World The impact produced by the 1939-1945 conflict was much greater than that caused by World War I, in that the battlefield was extended to almost the entire planet. In principle, the modifications produced in international trade affected relations between European and extra-European countries in two ways: 1. There was a perceptible inversion in the terms of trade to the detriment of developed European economies, which were large-scale importers. 2. There was a sharp decline in European countries' "invisible" incomes, as control of the seas shifted to the United States and maritime and commercial business had to be developed in other parts of the world. In addition, the war spurred industrial development in some traditionally importing countries of manufactured goods. However, the effect was much more complex: in principle, the conflict established a protectionist barrier that encouraged import-substituting industrial activity, but for many countries this was not enough, since it also included the shortage of raw materials, machinery and other factors essential for the development of industrial production. It is also worth noting that the technological lag was felt significantly, so that the industries that achieved some impetus were those that were limited to implementing simple technological developments. Thus, the textile, food and construction-related industries were those that had the most scope, driven by a demand that could not find its usual supplies. Only in Canada and Australia was there a broad and irreversible shift towards industrialization. In other nations, the war led to an widening of the gap that separated industrialized countries from those that were not - due to technological and organizational changes - which consequently fueled the desire to overcome it. In the particular case of Latin America, this was one of the scenarios where the United States consolidated its foothold, gaining markets in favor of the displacement of European countries (especially Great Britain). The balance of trade multiplied by five between 1938 and 1946, consolidating a process that had been gaining significance in the previous two decades. ### Technological Change World War II contributed to strengthening the widespread belief that wars stimulate inventions and promote innovations, which are then used in times of peace to boost economic development. Jet engines, rockets and radar, in addition to the atomic bomb, are the most resonant examples, but others of notable importance can be mentioned, such as penicillin. There was a special emphasis on developing substitutes for scarce raw materials such as rubber and oil. However, it is not possible to assert that the overall pace of technological progress increased during the war. It could be argued, on the other hand, that there was a shift towards certain areas - the aircraft industry was one such case, where notable results were obtained. Conversely, long-term research projects had little leeway, as they were displaced by urgencies linked, for example, to fears about what advances the enemy side might be making. In any event, it is not true that the civilian byproducts of war-related research would have been achieved just the same without the pressure of this research. Often, it was the less spectacular innovations that would later gain importance for production in peacetime. These ranged from the restructuring of plants to the development of fully automated and standardized manufacturing processes, and from improvements in worker training to more efficient management methods. In this sense, the economies of the main warring countries saw a notable effort geared towards improving productivity levels, which materialized in a striking reduction in the fabrication time of ships, airplanes and weapons, achieved through an improvement in business and organizational techniques. These aspects were so highly valued that in Great Britain, for example, contracts could be awarded to companies with proven efficient management teams, even before those with experience in manufacturing the good requested. It was often business talent that was crucial during the production stage, such as in the case of a large chocolate manufacturing company that made rockets One aspect to highlight about technological innovation during the war period was the State's intervention and control over the same. Projects like the atomic bomb and rocketry involved the government, which ventured into areas such as which research had to be continued and control over the scientists working on them. This intervention, which continued after the end of the war, was an inevitable process due to the high cost of technology and the security issues it entailed. Private companies usually saw their activity limited to fulfilling orders for materials placed by the government, with a design already established. On both sides, although not to the same extent, the actions of the state led to a situation where, although industries related to the war remained in private hands, in practice they could almost be considered government dependencies. ### The War and Society The 1939-1945 conflict resulted in a profound change in relation to World War I. While in the latter, the death rate of those who did not bear arms reached 20% of the total casualties, the percentage of civilians killed rose to almost half in the new war. On the other hand, the substantial decline in the birth rate that characterized the previous conflict did not repeat itself; what happened was that difficulties in food supply and hygiene issues had a significant impact on infant mortality. As the war unfolded on several fronts, with priority given to supplying soldiers, and exacerbated by the duration of the conflict, the problem of food supplies for the civilian population became dramatic. In general, communication difficulties once again favored rural inhabitants over those in cities. Agriculture retreated upon itself, then having more resources available for its own subsistence. It was only through family relationships, and overcoming major obstacles, that city dwellers sometimes participated in this relative prosperity. Rationing and the black market were the two sides of the problem of food supply in the rearguard. While, on the one hand, governments such as those of Germany and Great Britain rigidly established diets that had to be the same for the entire population, the black market was transformed into an almost essential option to complete a normal diet, although in some cases, such as that of the French under German occupation, it was another way of resisting the invader. Society's stance towards the war varied according to nations. In Great Britain, the government's call for resistance met with a united response from the population in the face of German bombing raids. It is hard to disagree with those who argue that "this war, unlike the previous one, was deeply popular." (8) Stalinist Russia, in turn, successfully used nationalist discourse to consolidate the population in the war effort. In his first radio address following the German invasion, the Soviet leader presented the confrontation as a "national patriotic war" in which the enemy aimed "to seize our lands irrigated by the sweat of our brows, to seize our wheat and our oil, produced by our hands." (9) Similarly, in France, the presence of the Nazis and the early occupation of a large part of the territory allowed the regime installed in Vichy, headed by Marshal PETAIN, to put into practice trends that had existed in French society since the end of the 19th century. The slogan "Think PETAIN and you'll live as a Frenchman," which entailed a return to the "eternal values of French civilization," concealed the fact that it was a regime dependent on the Germans. To the active or passive collaboration of a part of French society, General DE GAULLE opposed, calling for the struggle from London, and the groups that operated inside, constituting concrete proof of the will to resist the invader present in sectors (ever more numerous) of French citizenship. In the United States, the economic expansion not only led to the disappearance of the unemployment levels that had existed during the 1930s, but also to a redistribution of incomes in favor of wage earners. However, not all the consequences were positive: the accelerated urbanization, a product of industrial growth, led to a notable shortage of housing, and the new living conditions, affected in many cases by the absence of the family head enlisted in the front, led to the emergence of a serious problem of juvenile delinquency, which worsened in the following years. Much more difficult to assess is the reaction of German and Italian societies, which had been subject to repressive control for several years. As it seems that, with the left decimated and young men massively mobilized for the front, the German people did not show visible signs of opposition to the war, the Italians manifested themselves increasingly against the country's participation in it, an opposition that in many cases began with MUSSOLINI's rapprochement with HITLER and the progressive subordination of Italian foreign policy to Nazi strategy. A paragraph deserves the resistance movements that arose against the Nazi-fascist occupation troops. The cruelty of that occupation, which had its most horrifying manifestation in the concentration camps and in the so-called "final solution" of the Jewish question, gave rise to the emergence of reactions that grew in importance as the Third Reich's power declined. As the German occupation unfolded over vast territories, wide spaces remained free, where the partisans set up their bases of operation, trying to influence the surrounding population. The BBC in London was the inspiration of the resistance; the entire European continent was listening to it secretly, all those who participated in the liberation or sympathized with it. In addition to news, it broadcast coded messages for resistance groups, and others to confuse enemy intelligence services. As military actions were anticipating the allied victory, these movements, in which the communists played a leading role, participated decisively in the liberation of France, Italy and Yugoslavia. A fundamental element of them was that all the programs developed underground proposed democratic reforms, but above all, of the socio-economic system, starting from a broad plan for nationalization of basic industries. The dissemination of these programs and the majority consensus established around their main points were a weighty factor in the immediate postwar scenario. ### Preparing For the Future By the end of the war, the world situation facing the future was unpredictable. No previous confrontation had been so destructive, nor had it been preceded by a depression as deep and lasting as that of the 1930s. Therefore, there was a widespread demand for the construction of a new international economic order. However, it was not clear what the characteristics of this new order should be. There was a favorable starting point: unlike what happened after the 1914-1918 war, the United States had no intention of withdrawing from the economic and political scene, and the presence of the most powerful nation on the planet was essential for a viable system to be constructed. North American experts began working on this matter in 1942 and held meetings with English colleagues, designed to establish a code of rules for monetary affairs and international economic relations, to govern after the war. Positions were divergent. The British, influenced by KEYNES' work, were concerned with ensuring the implementation of measures aimed at achieving full employment. In this sense, they argued that the value of currency should be variable, to adapt it to the needs of national policy. Similarly, the ideas set out in the Beveridge Report (10), published in 1942, which advocated the creation of a comprehensive social security system designed to protect citizens from the consequences of unemployment, illness, accidents and old age, had taken deep root. The Americans, for their part, emphasized other issues: aware that the United States would be the main creditor in the post-war world, they directed their recommendations towards establishing mechanisms to ensure the free movement of goods and services, and which therefore prohibited discrimination in trade and government restrictions on international payments. The outcome of these diverse points of view was a negotiated compromise reached at the Bretton Woods (New Hampshire) international conference, held in 1944, in which representatives from forty-four countries participated. The Agreement establishing the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was signed there, as well as another for the establishment of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). The most salient features of the consensus reached were reflected in the articles of the IMF Agreement. First, it stipulated the creation of an international monetary system placed halfway between fixed exchange rates and flexibility. Each country was obliged to establish a fixed parity of its currency in terms of gold or the dollar, but the same could be modified to correct a serious imbalance. Furthermore, a credit fund for financing payment problems or to address speculative situations was created, composed of contributions from the countries that make up it. Finally, it proposed the existence of a multilateral payment system based on the free convertibility of currencies and elimination of exchange controls on commercial transactions. Difficulties in the first postwar years prevented the agreements reached in Bretton Woods from being put into practice, but they proved fundamental during the period of generalized prosperity that occurred during the 1950s and 1960s.