Appeasement and War

Thus it leant wholehearted support to his Empire Crusade of 1929-31 – even introducing the helmeted crusader on its masthead which the paper keeps to this day – which was the extension of his early tariff reform sympathies to 'whole hog' protectionism; it gave cover to his attacks on Baldwin; and, most notoriously of all, it became a sounding board for his opinions on the abdication crisis, appeasement, and relations with Russia.

 

The crusades of appeasement and the campaign for closer relations with Russia almost left the Daily Express seriously derailed, (not in the battle for circulation, indeed in these years circulation climbed further), but as a continuing beacon of serious opinion.

 

The issues illustrated both the power of subjugating the press to the mindset of a single person, and the chronic myopia that such a practice could create. Beaverbrook had been in tentative contact with Ribbentrop since 1937, and had – admittedly in the name of European stability – been preaching a conciliatory attitude towards Germany through his newspapers. An Evening Standard leader opined in September 1937: 'The chief error in British policy towards Germany is a matter not so much of actions as of attitudes.

 

For years past British politicians have spoken harshly of Nazi Germany purely because it is Nazi … is it not possible to sweep that atmosphere away?'. On learning of Ribbentrop's appointment as Foreign Minister in March 1938, Beaverbrook wrote to congratulate: 'It is with real pleasure that I hear today of your appointment … I know full well that you will take full advantage of your great authority and immense power … you will have the loyal support of my newspapers.'

 

In September 1938, the Daily Express famously declared that Britain would 'not be involved in a European war this year, or next year either'; Beaverbrook kept on declaring it to the bitter end, almost until Hitler's Panzer divisions arrived at the gates of Cherkley. (It is ironic indeed that the searing polemic, Guilty Men, fired off in 1940 against the appeasers of the 1930s, was written by a number of Beaverbrook journalists, Michael Foot, Peter Howard, and Frank Owen. It did not mention Beaverbrook. It should have done.)

 

A similar lack of foresight was evident in his dealings with Russia: a meeting with Stalin in September 1941, led to a determined campaign to supply Russia with armaments and to open up a second front as soon as was possible, perfectly arguable in their own right. Not so, was his sympathetic stance towards Stalin, a stance that continued in the post war years against all evidence to the contrary.

 

Speaking in Washington in April 1942 he argued that 'Communism under Stalin has provided us with examples of patriotism equal to the finest annals of history ? Communism under Stalin has won the applause and admiration of all western nations ? Political purges? Of course. But it is now clear that the men who were shot down would have betrayed Russia to her German enemy.'