For the last sixty years, the West has been taught that World War II was a moral War of good versus evil, of freedom versus totalitarianism, of tolerance versus prejudice. And because we are Westerners, because this narrative flatters our sense of superiority, we have endorsed it as truth. After all, not only have the unspeakable sins of despots like Hitler left us with plenty of evidence to support this self-congratulatory retelling, we had to find some way of psychologically and spiritually justifying the immense cost, in lives and resources, the war's prosecution levied upon the world. Certainly, there is truth in this narrative -- the barbarity of the Axis powers staggers the mind --, but it does not automatically follow that the Allied powers that fought them were noble.
In Moral Combat, Mr. Burleigh, a British historian, investigates the extent to which all of the national combatants in World War II neglected their humanity, carrying out a war that cost the lives of 60 million people and forever reshaped our world. From the bombing of Dresden to the rape of Nanking,His chronicle, coming in at some 650 pages, extensively reconstructs both the war's crimes and their social, political, and ethical consequences. Though the spotlight here is often trained on the atrocities committed by the Nazis and their allies, understandably so given their brutality, the extent to which these crimes have been imprinted upon our collective consciousness by past reconstructions saps them of their punch, especially relative to the underreported crimes of the Allies which Mr. Burleigh relentlessly and thoroughly assembles here. For while countless films, books and stories ensure that we will never forget the Holocaust, how many of us remember that, for want of an ally with which to resist the overwhelming might of Nazi Germany, Winston Churchill, that most venerated leader of World War II, joined forces with the most murderous dictator of the 20th century, Joseph Stalin who, by the time of their alliance, already had the blood of millions staining his hands?
Though Moral Combat lacks the focus and intensity of Bloodlands, its lengthy and fairhanded reconstruction of war crimes during the Second World War is both potent and enlightening. It dismisses the popular narrative declaring WWII a war of good versus evil and replaces it with the more realistic notion of a war of clashing ideologies, democracy versus totalitarianism. And though we might wish to believe otherwise, neither side is able to claim the moral high ground. For as many times as the allies might point to the Death Camps as symbols of Nazi depravity, the Nazis could, if they were here, point to Dresden and the rape and bombing of Berlin as moral crimes the victorious Allies never had to answer for. After all, the defeated foe can hardly set up their own Nuremberg, their own Tokyo.
For all that Moral Combat is vigorous and thorough, Mr. Burleigh fails to draw any conclusions from his research. Though he dispenses with the allied claim of moral superiority, he does not speak to any of the broader themes his research uncovered. His chronicle allows the reader to conclude that war crimes are an inevitable outcome of Total War, that a nation cannot practice Total War without inviting the possibility of equally total destruction, but we never learn if these are the author's conclusions. For other than a handful of sarcastic comments, he is silent on what he has learned. Perhaps he meant this to be an academic text from which his readers must draw their own conclusions, but we read great historians as much for the clarity of their insight as we do for the power of their research. Timothy Snyder did not fail his duty as a historian by opining in Bloodlands. After consuming 650 pages of academic writing, a few of the author's own conclusions is the least the reader can expect.
Interesting and at times provocative, but its flaws leave substantial holes in the end product. (3/5 Stars)
No comments:
Post a Comment