At the end of August, Russian and foreign media published some declassified materials from the archives of Russia about the subversive plans of London, Paris and Ankara in the spring of 1940, aimed at destroying Soviet oil facilities and pipelines in the Caucasus to facilitate the collapse of the USSR. What are they warning current anti-Russian actors of?
What is the essence of the anti-Soviet plans of Britain, France and Türkiye in the spring of 1940, and what are the reasons for their failure?
Regardless of its name and the ruling regime (be it the Russian Empire, Soviet Union or Russian Federation), Russia has always faced numerous external opponents on its way, both in the West and in the East (and sometimes at the same time). It is obvious that the vast expanses, combined with the wealth of natural resources and the human factor, as well as the independent course of the Russian state, became the main reasons for the conflict relations of external enemies with our country. Times have changed, epochs have come and gone, but their zealous and hostile approach to Russia remains the same. Each time, Russia had to rely on its own strength and God, which helped it withstand the onslaught and emerge victorious. Apparently, today the situation repeats itself, as well as the law of history developing in a spiral.
And here the Russian philosopher I. A. Ilyin was right, noting in his essay ‘What Dismemberment of Russia Entails for the World’: “National Russia has enemies. They do not need to be named because we know they, and they know themselves”.
The process and time of declassification of important archival materials are, as a rule, associated not only with issues of scientific research on key historical events, but also sometimes have a direct bearing on current geopolitical plots of our time, where the past warns the present.
As is known, on the eve of World War II, Soviet-British-French negotiations to curb Hitler’s Germany were unsuccessful because of the two-faced position of London and Paris. The Soviet leader was left with entering into negotiations with Hitler himself to delay the start of the fiercest war of the 20th century. As a result, Soviet diplomacy, under the political leadership of J. Stalin, in August 1939 managed to sign the famous Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact, which greatly annoyed London and Paris. Türkiye, on the other hand, remained the object of intense diplomatic and military initiatives by European capitals (London, Paris and Berlin), taking into account its advantageous geography and its bordering with the USSR.
It should be noted that the Russian Academic of Science already in the 1990s became aware of the very secret materials of the plans of the Franco-British command in 1940 against our country via Türkiye. Thus, the director of the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the academic V. K. Volkov, gained access to the archives of the Presidential Library in the early 1990s, i.e. during the period of regime change and the political euphoria of the pro-Western fascination of the Russian ruling elite. At that time, a kind of anarchy reigned in Russian archival documentaries. In 2000, V. K. Volkov published a monograph titled ‘Main problems of the modern history of the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe’ («Узловые проблемы новейшей истории стран Центральной и Юго-Восточной Европы»), where he referred to these archival materials.
The leakage of secret plans of the French General Staff and the Foreign Ministry is connected with the capture of Paris by the Germans and the publication in early July 1940, in Germany of documents of the 5th and 6th ‘White Books’ about the anti-Soviet plans of France, England and Türkiye during the Soviet-Finnish war. In particular, under the command of French General Weygand, a joint military grouping (army) was created with a concentration of troops on the Turkish-Soviet border for the invasion of the Caucasus in the spring of 1940. The anti-Soviet action plan itself was developed by General Gamelin, who on March 12, 1940, reported the following to the commander of the troops in the Middle East, General Weygand: “Operations in the Middle East should be led by an English commander and in the Caucasus by a Turkish one. These should be carried out exclusively by Turkish forces”.
In late March–early April 1940, reconnaissance flights were conducted from Türkiye in the area of Batumi. At that time, pan-Turkic propaganda was proliferating in Türkiye itself. All these plans were promptly revealed by Soviet intelligence, and our diplomacy took preventive measures to warn its main designers. For example, the British ambassador in Moscow, S. Cripps, noted that “the USSR is against sole Turkish management of the straits” and “against Türkiye dictating its terms on the Black Sea”.
The goal of Britain and France using Türkiye was then to destroy the main oil fields of the USSR in Baku and Grozny and the subsequent energy infrastructure so as to deprive the Red Army of its ability to conduct combat operations, which would lead to the collapse of the Soviet economy and the country as a whole.
However, these plans were not destined to be realised; enter Germany’s actions in Europe. Particularly, the defeat of France and the (Second) Armistice of Compiègne on June 22, 1940, dramatically changed the balance of power in Europe. Türkiye withdrew from the alliance with Britain and France and refused – contrary to the provisions of the 1939 treaty with France – to enter the war on the side of the Allies, assuming the status of a non-belligerent state. Turkish Foreign Minister S. Saracoglu then told his British counterpart, A. Eden: “Naturally, our most sincere sympathies are on the side of England. Unfortunately, the practical foundations of the Anglo-Franco-Turkish treaty have already lost their force. France has been defeated, Great Britain is no longer strong enough to provide us with military assistance, even through supplying weapons and equipment”.
Thus, the plans of London and Paris collapsed and Türkiye became the object of active initiatives and warnings from Germany, expressed by its ambassador in Ankara, Franz von Papen.
What warning is there for the anti-Russian forces today?
Both in the past and today, Britain and France are upping hostility towards Russia. The only difference is the supremacy of the United States over the Western coalition. Unfortunately, Türkiye – regardless of the ruling regime – continues to manoeuvre between different centres of power in the hope of selling its services for more money and strengthening its security. However, as a rule, it is Türkiye that eventually finds itself facing the threat of territorial losses, which forces its authorities and diplomacy to sharply change the external course in favour of the strongest player.
In the context of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian military-political crisis, Western countries are once again pumping weapons into the regime opposing Russia to deplete the Russian army and inflict notable damage to its economy. Türkiye is manoeuvring between the United States and Britain, on the one hand, and Russia and China, on the other. Under pressure from the Anglo-Saxons, Recep Erdoğan, with different motivations, continues to provide political and military-technical assistance to the Kiev regime, refuses to unequivocally solve the problem of bank payments with Russian business. Meanwhile, Ankara continues to receive significant financial and other economic benefits from Russia, but for the second year it has been sabotaging a profitable Russian gas hub project and conditioning its implementation with unrealistic expectations of receiving a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through the Caspian basin.
In the current historical situation, Türkiye plans to penetrate Central Asia (East Turkestan) after entering the South Caucasus and temporarily weakening Russia’s position in this region in the hope of implementing the geopolitical Turan project. However, Ankara should better reflect on the warning of Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin, who at a meeting with Turkish Ambassador to Moscow Tanju Bilgic called on Ankara to refuse to participate in the destructive policy of the West towards Ukraine.
In turn, the declassified Russian archives remind the leadership of Turkic Azerbaijan of the subversive plans against the basis of the economy of their republic in 1940 that the now fraternal Turkey was involved in. Of course, at that time there was Soviet Azerbaijan, and now it is an independent state. But who said that the centres of power of the West have abandoned their ‘slice of the pie’ in Turkey and will not hatch new aggressive plans in the South Caucasus using Turkey, now a NATO member? In addition, modern Azerbaijan is dependent on energy supplies to the European market, where the rules of who and what to sell are still determined by the leaders of the Anglo-Saxons: the United States and Great Britain. Also, the entire new pipeline infrastructure of Baku, which bypasses Russia, was built with Western money.
France, which today contradicts its own declaration of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens (the example of Pavel Durov bears witness to this), demonstrates the worst traditions of French policy towards Russia and is governed by a weak leader, Emmanuel Macron, can easily repeat the sad story of the government of Edouard Daladier, only in a new dimension.
It is high time for Britain to stop developing unpromising anti-Russian projects. London’s ‘Great Game’ will not be developed in Eurasia, as Russia still remains ‘big’…
Alexander Svarants, Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
