In June 1944, nearly 3 million Allied troops crossed the English Channel and landed in Normandy, France, and began the conquest of the German army in Western Europe. Although the Anglo-American Allies regarded the battle as the most crucial battle of World War II, in the eyes of the Soviets and Stalin, Britain and the United States were competing with the Soviet Union for the fruits of victory. So why did the Soviets have this idea, and did the Allied military operations in Normandy have other purposes?
It is understandable that the Allies were slow to open up a second front. At the beginning, in the winter of 1941, when the German army attacked Moscow at the most dangerous moment, Stalin asked the British and American allies for help several times, but Churchill used various excuses to prevaricate, and when the Battle of Stalingrad was won, the situation on the Soviet-German battlefield underwent a major reversal, and the Allies chose to land in Normandy at this time. Why, then, did Britain and the United States not open a second front at the height of the Soviet-German war?
First, britain and the United States have a fire in their own backyards, and there is no time to take care of the frost on the tiles of others. In fact, Germany also had several helpers before launching World War II, and the formation of the German-Italian-Japanese Axis powers made the old colonial countries such as Britain and France feel threatened. Germany and Italy invaded North Africa, and Japan went south to the Pacific Ocean, which invisibly posed a challenge to Britain and France and other countries.
Second, Churchill was unable to support himself and could only rely on the United States to support the scene. As the most active Churchill of the three giants of the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union in World War II, his personal coordination ability had a positive effect on the Allies in opening up a second battlefield. However, the negative defensive strategy left by the British in the Chamberlain era also laid the hidden danger of lip service for him, and he could only rely on the United States to support the scene.
Third, the United States has no legal reason to send troops, and it is afraid that Moscow will not be able to rely on it. Compared with the unfavorable situation of Britain after the surrender of France, the United States benefited from both inside and outside. Although after the outbreak of World War II, the United States severed economic ties with the Axis powers, but it was skeptical about whether Stalin could withstand the German offensive, so if Moscow could not hold back, Roosevelt would not rush to send troops.
In the history of U.S. military combat, there are few helpers who will not let his people risk death. The same was true of World War II, although the Soviet Union fought on the Eastern Front, after all, it was a matter of another front, and the United States had to deal with the Allied forces' own affairs before they could take care of other people's business. The United States was not in a hurry to achieve success in Stalin's impatience; on the contrary, the more fiercely the Soviet-German battlefield was fought, the happier Britain and the United States were.
First, war is in the service of politics. Although Germany launched World War II unintendedly, it was also eradicating dissidents for the Western Front, and from this point of view, Churchill never really had a true heart with the Soviet Union from the beginning of the war to the end of World War II.
Second, France's capitulation invisibly reduced its status and deprived it of its position in the Anglo-French alliance. Although de Gaulle's Free French Front was also fighting against Germany, this force was not recognized by Britain and the United States, and it was inseparable from the support of the French to open a second battlefield, which made Churchill feel distressed.
Third, the United States is reluctant to take the lead in the performance of Britain and France in Europe. Of course, the United States knows how much it has gained and lost, not to mention that the United States is a country that is still neutral. Especially before the meeting of the three giants of Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union, the British army only needed the United States to pay for equipment, but Roosevelt was unwilling to be the wronged leader, how could he get the fruits of World War II in Europe without sending troops? Therefore, it was useless for the Soviets and Stalin to be in a hurry until the Allies had been coordinated within themselves.
Commenting on the significance of the Allied landing in Normandy, the American historian Samur Nüland said: "From the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to the fall of Paris, from the defense of Stalingrad to the capture of Berlin, no battle in World War II has been as significant as the Normandy landing." "It's just the Americans themselves saying it, but the Soviets don't think so."
First, long before the Allied landings, the United States had already planned its post-World War II layout. At the Casablanca Conference in 1943, President Roosevelt of the United States made a public speech stating that it was only a matter of time before the Allies won, but the end was that the three Axis powers must surrender unconditionally. This is tantamount to telling Germany, Italy, and Japan that when the war is over, I will take over you.
Second, after the Normandy landings, the Allies achieved much less than the Soviet-German battlefield. Logically, the British and American Allies spent so much effort and made such a big move, and they should have achieved great results on the Western Front, and as a result, the Allies would have been almost beaten back to the beaches of Normandy if the Germans had not taken the initiative to retreat. Operation Market Garden and the Battle of the Ardennes suffered heavy allied losses, and these two battles were very passive compared to the advanced equipment of Britain and the United States.
Third, the timing of the Allied landings in Normandy made the Soviets angry. By June 1944, the U.S. army had gained the initiative in the Pacific Theater, and the Soviets had won the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of Kursk Tanks. At this point, even if the Allies did not land in Normandy, the Soviets could still defeat the Germans, but it was only a matter of time. As far as the Soviet army is concerned, what is it that Britain and the United States did not grab the fruits of victory with him? This is why, during the attack on Berlin, Roosevelt ordered the Americans not to provoke the Soviets.
Summary: Although the Soviets believed that the Allied landings in Normandy had little impact on the Soviet-German battlefield, their positive significance was obvious to all in the history of World War II. The Normandy landings not only accelerated the process of German defeat, but also had a profound impact on the post-war layout. However, if there were no Allied landings in Europe from Normandy, there would be no Cold War mentality behind it, and there would be no important position of the United States in Europe. In this sense, the Normandy landings were indeed more political than military, and it is not wrong to say that the operation was a non-military operation.
For more information, please pay attention to what the island owner said, and readers who like this article should like, collect and share it!
References: The Complete History of World War II, The Great Storm of Normandy
Wonderful recommendation: The Soviet-German War of World War II, why the Third Battle of Kharkov accelerated the process of German defeat
In the Battle of Moscow, why did Stalin not allow Zhukov to retreat from the command post and give him the strength to hold on
In World War II, the Soviet army invaded East Asia, why Stalin reused Vasilevsky, Zhukov had another important task
In the Battle of Lezhev in World War II, why Did Modell become famous in the First World War, Zhukov took care of both ends of the body and lack of skills