REVIEW OF "A QUESTION OF HONOR" - EXCHANGE OF LETTERS BETWEEN THE AUTHORS AND THE REVIEWER

LETTER BY MINISTER WŁADYSŁAW BARTOSZEWSKI

Review of "A Question of Honor", Olson and Cloud

by John Whiteclay Chambers II

The Washington Post, September 21, 2003

BOOK WORLD; MILITARY HISTORY

Lynne Olson and Stanley Cloud's A Question of Honor: The Kosciuszko Squadron: Forgotten Heroes of World War II begins as an exciting story of a group of heroic Polish fighter pilots fighting for England after their own country fell to Hitler in 1939.
Named after a Polish patriot who fought in the American Revolution, the squadron chalked up twice as many kills as any other RAF unit, its skilled and daredevil pilots swooping their Hawker Hurricanes directly at the bombers and fighters of the Luftwaffe. In their enthusiasm, the authors overreach by crediting this single squadron with making the difference between victory and defeat in the 1940 Battle of Britain.

This is indeed a tale of heroism, camaraderie and glory. The dashing,gallant, impetuous Poles became the darlings of British high society and were lionized by the press in Britain and America. The authors vividly recreate the airmen's daily bouts with death and nights of partying, their lost lives and loves, and their frustrations with English fastidiousness and idiosyncrasies -- everything in the British planes seemed to be the opposite of where it was in Poland. (Because none of the fliers remains alive, this husband-and-wife team interviewed the pilots' children to augment written sources.)

Olson and Cloud dilute their otherwise fascinating account of the Kosciuszko Squadron by devoting the second half of this lengthy book to a history of Poland in World War II. The result is an unwieldy and ultimately unsatisfactory effort to meld two different stories. The long recapitulation of the generally well-known wartime history of Poland overwhelms the fresh material about the aviators.

In addition, this retelling of the Polish national saga has some rather

peculiar aspects. The emphasis is on non-Jewish Poles; references to anti-Semitism or the Holocaust are minimal. The authors have chosen to stress Polish individualism, nationalism and resistance to Nazism and communism on the one hand and the manipulation and betrayal of Poland by other major powers on the other. In their lengthy and rather polemical account of Allied diplomacy, the authors vigorously (and rather simplistically) condemn President Franklin Roosevelt for "betraying" Poland to the Soviet Union.

As these four books illustrate in such different ways, the many disparate aspects of the epochal conflict of 1939-45 can be re-examined through new perspectives and newly obtained sources, from previously classified documents about decision-making to fresh oral histories of ordinary people living in that extraordinary time.

World War II was a defining moment in the 20th century. It was a time of enormous challenge and also of great hope for a better world at home and abroad. Is it any wonder that it continues to be so fascinating today? *

John Whiteclay Chambers II teaches history at Rutgers University and is editor-in-chief of "The Oxford Companion to American Military History."

Olson and Cloud Respond

The Washington Post, October 12, 2003

Book World, Letters

We are grateful to John Whiteclay Chambers II for the nice things he had to say in his review of our book A Question of Honor (Book World, Sept. 21). But he commits factual errors or leaves us wondering what he could possibly have meant.

He writes: "In their enthusiasm, the authors overreach by crediting [the Polish Kosciuszko Squadron] with making the difference between victory and defeat in the 1940 Battle of Britain." But we make no such claim. What we do claim is that Polish pilots in general (not least the Kosciuszko Squadron, but not exclusively, either) played a critical role in the battle. To support that position, we quote a number of documents and experts, including Queen Elizabeth II and Air Marshall Sir Hugh Dowding, chief of the RAF's

Fighter Command at the time. Here is what Dowding said (quoted on p. 163 in our book): "Had it not been for the magnificent [work of] the Polish squadrons [please note the plural] and their unsurpassed gallantry, I hesitate to say that the outcome of the battle would have been the same."

Chambers also says that we "condemn" Franklin Roosevelt for selling out the Poles at the end of the war. Well, "condemn" is a pretty loaded word. We do strongly criticize Roosevelt, but it is important to note (although Chambers fails to do so) that we are also at least as critical of Winston Churchill on the same score.

Chambers also claims that we emphasize non-Jewish Poles and that our "references to anti-Semitism or the Holocaust are minimal." He doesn't explain why he finds it "peculiar" to write about "non-Jewish Poles." In any case, that is not what we do. Our book tells the story of Poland's contributions, by both non-Jews and Jews, to the Allied military effort in World War II, a story that we believe is far from "well known." We also tell about the betrayal of those contributions by Britain and the United States.

Polish anti-Semitism and the Holocaust are generally tangential to that story. Nevertheless, where they are more than tangential, we do deal with them -- and quite strongly, we think. Space does not permit us to quote all the passages, but let us cite one of many:

On p. 201, at the beginning of nine pages on the Holocaust and its relationship to the Nazis' treatment of all Poles, we write: "The Holocaust was unique. Under the Nazis, Jews, regardless of country, were to suffer unimaginable horrors. No single group suffered more. But the full, terrible machinery for their mass liquidation would not be in place for another two years. In the meantime, they were herded into ever shrinking, ever more appalling ghettos, while the Nazis concentrated on murdering non-Jewish Pole."

STANLEY CLOUD & LYNNE OLSON, Washington, D.C.

John Whiteclay Chambers II responds:

The book's key section on the Battle of Britain ends with a paragraph that begins: "In the opinion of a number of RAF pilots and commanders, the contribution of the Poles, particularly those in the Kosciuszko Squadron, made the difference between victory and defeat in the battle" (p. 163). Since the rest of the paragraph reinforces that opinion, the reader is led to believe the authors themselves concur.

The authors' tone towards Roosevelt's (and Churchill's) dealings with Stalin is condemnatory. In regard to the Curzon Line as the Russo-Polish border, for example, the authors state flatly "The Polish prime minister was devastated by this betrayal...."(p. 357).

In regard to the minimal treatment of the Holocaust, given that the vast majority of the three million Jews who lived in Poland before World War II died in that genocide, devoting fewer than nine pages to it seemed a noticeable omission in a 500-page book.

While the above points note weaknesses, the book's strength lies in its wonderfully fresh account of the daredevil Polish aviators in the RAF.

RADA OCHRONY PAMIECI WALK I MECZENSTWA

Letter by Minister Władysław Bartoszewski

Warsaw, December 23, 2003

Dr. John Whiteclay Chambers II

Rutgers University

Rutgers History Department

New Brunswick, NJ 08901

Dear Dr. Chambers,

Poland, whose territorial integrity has been altered many times over the centuries, is sensitive to the complexities of its tragic past. As you are well aware, Polish nation incurred tremendous losses during World War II. Without taking into consideration the terrible suffering of war - lost lives, destroyed cities, plundered national treasures - one cannot fully comprehend the history of Poland. It is my strong belief that any attempt to minimize Polish losses is historically inaccurate and morally wrong.

In the review of the book titled A Question of Honor: The Kościuszko Squadron: Forgotten Heroes of the World War II you called peculiar the author’s emphasis on the contribution of non-Jewish Poles to the victory of the allies over the Nazi Germany. Such a statement raises a "red flag" for the Polish readers. It reveals deeply rooted stereotype view of the history of Poland during Second World War, so widespread in the western historiography. The Polish struggle against the German and Soviet aggressors (the latter being merely noted) is usually presented on the margins of the Holocaust. It is true that the Germans placed their notorious killing centers on the Polish soil. It is also true that the bulk of the Holocaust victims were the Jews from Poland. But there is more to the history of Poland and its population during the war. By no means, it is my intention to diminish the importance of the Holocaust, but rather to turn the attention to the Polish efforts undertaken to defend independence and freedom. In my judgment, the knowledge of this history is far from satisfactory among the West European and American public.

A sense of being betrayed lies at the core of the Polish wartime experience. Its ultimate reason comes out of the assumption that the defeat of Nazi Germany did not result in restoration of Poland's independence and freedom.

There is more to it than that. The strategic concept of the defense of Poland was based on the expectations that our Western allies would keep their promises. In September 1939, Poland faced the German invasion with a full awareness of disparity in military capabilities unfavorable to the Polish forces. But we had more than tanks and aircrafts. We had assurances from our allies: France and the United Kingdom that they would help us out if we resisted the impact of the German troops for a few weeks, a period necessary to undertake appropriate steps to launch a counter-attack. Even today, I remember a cheering crowd gathered at the British and French embassies in Warsaw on September 3, 1939, when both countries declared war on Germany. Even though the resistance of the Polish army had lasted for five weeks, the anticipated counter offensive on the Western front had never been launched. With anger and frustration we watched German and Soviet troops pouring into Poland, wondering: why our mighty allies remained inactive, while we fulfilled our task.

The agreement concluded in Yalta between the Unites States, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union, acknowledging Stalin’s demands, sealed the fate of the Central Europe. Bitterness of its outcome was exacerbated by exclusion of the recognized Polish government in London from the proceedings of the conference. Our fate was determined without our presence. Both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill accepted Stalin’s claims to include Central and East European countries into the Soviet sphere of influence. What else could we feel than being once again betrayed? In spite of our contribution to the victory over the Nazi Germany (after all the Polish soldiers fought against the Germans for the longest time among allied forces), we did not have much influence on decisions made at a table in this Soviet resort.

I have just marked two moments, one at the beginning and the second one at the end of the war, to illustrate where the sense of being betrayed comes from. There were other developments, when our Western allies did not offer us the support we deserved (e.g. their passive policy at the time of the Warsaw Uprising of 1944) or demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of a Polish point of view (e.g. Churchill's negative reaction to the Polish efforts to investigate the murder of the thousands of Polish soldiers, policemen, civil servants by the Soviet terror apparatus in the spring of 1940).

Poles were aware of the geopolitical rationale for appeasing Stalin’s colonial aspirations. However, being aware does not mean accepting. For my fellow-inmates at the Auschwitz concentration camp, for my friends from the anti-nazi and anti-communist underground movement in occupied Poland and for all of us engaged in trying to rescue as many Holocaust victims as possible, hope for victory and freedom was pivotal to carry on the fight.

The victory came, but the freedom was missing. It took almost fifty years for our dreams to come true. I am thankful that I could personally contribute to the prevalence of democracy in my country. I feel grateful that as a minister of foreign affairs I could strengthen my country’'s anchorage in NATO and the European Union. It gives us a solid assurance that our voice will be heard and no one will ever decide about us without us.

I am obliged to my friends, killed by the Nazi Germans and the Soviets, to preserve memory of their sacrifices and thus to assure that they did not give their lives in vain. This is why peculiar sounds highly inappropriate in this context.

In 1942 a book by a Polish writer entitled Squadron 303 was published in the United Kingdom, telling a remarkable story of the Polish pilots defending the English sky against the German attack. A year later the same book was passionately read by many of us in occupied Poland, which filled our hearts with hope and pride. I strongly commend Lynn Olson and Stanley Cloud for retelling it to the English speaking readers. I see it as a tribute paid to the brave ones. Moreover, I hope it will also contribute to a better understanding of the Polish history in the country, which Poland considers its greatest ally.

Sincerely,

Władysław Bartoszewski

Honorary Citizen of the State of Israel

Minster of Foreign Affairs of Republic of Poland (1995, 2000-2001)

Cc.: Dr. Richard McCormick, President, Rutgers University

Ms. Marie Arana, Editor, Book World, The Washington Post

Mrs. Lynn Olson, Mr. Stanley Cloud

Mr. Ludwik Wnękowicz, Polish American Congress, New Jersey Division