Central European History post World War 2

[AlbertBeale]

Also, Berlin was technically two capitals until 1990; East Berlin being the capital of the German Democratic Republic and West Berlin being its own distinct political entity from the Federal Republic of Germany. The latter's residents were exempt from Bundeswehr conscription for example.

mods note - split from this thread:

Is Berlin Hbf the capital city station with the most direct trains to other capitals?

This weekend I will travel from Stockholm to Oslo on the first direct train since March 2020. So, along with Snälltåget's (seasonal) night train to Germany, Stockholm now has direct trains to three other capital cities (Oslo, Copenhagen and Berlin). But which single railway station in a...

www.railforums.co.uk

West Berlin duing that era isn't the only such "anomaly" - the Åland Islands, between Sweden and Finland, are part of Finland but with a special status (such as Swedish being the only official language, whereas in the rest of Finland people are taught both Finnish and Swedish); as a result of the treaty agreeing that it was part of Finland (the islands having been claimed by about 5 different Baltic powers) it was demilitarised. Because of this, Finnish conscription laws don't apply there.

Partly because of this, both Berlin and Åland have been a popular venue for international pacifist meetings.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Also, Berlin was technically two capitals until 1990; East Berlin being the capital of the German Democratic Republic and West Berlin being its own distinct political entity from the Federal Republic of Germany. The latter's residents were exempt from Bundeswehr conscription for example.

To split hairs and to get very pedantic, neither were capitals. West Berlin was legally under Four Power occupation, and although it had many elements of statehood, everything was legally derived from the Allied occupation. Likewise with East Berlin, which was never officially recognised as the capital of East Germany by three of the four Allied powers. According to the laws governing the occupation of the city, East Berlin couldn't be the capital. Even East Germany mostly accepted this as fact, because their representatives to the Volkskammer were not directly elected, nor did their representatives have full voting rights until the 1980s.

If memory serves, East Germany did consider establishing the capital in Potsdam, but they ended up going with East Berlin.

the border station at Friedrichstrasse, where you could actually find an Intershop duty-free on the Western platforms without the need to go through GDR border controls. But watch out for customs officers when you returned...

Yes, those Intershops (there was also one on the U-Bahn) were a good source of hard currency for East Germany. West Berlin protested about this trade, but it was broadly understood that these shops were part of the price of maintaining the useful interchange in Friedrichstrasse between the U and S-Bahn networks.

 

[AlbertBeale]

To split hairs and to get very pedantic, neither were capitals. West Berlin was legally under Four Power occupation, and although it had many elements of statehood, everything was legally derived from the Allied occupation. Likewise with East Berlin, which was never officially recognised as the capital of East Germany by three of the four Allied powers. According to the laws governing the occupation of the city, East Berlin couldn't be the capital. Even East Germany mostly accepted this as fact, because their representatives to the Volkskammer were not directly elected, nor did their representatives have full voting rights until the 1980s.

If memory serves, East Germany did consider establishing the capital in Potsdam, but they ended up going with East Berlin.

To be even more pedantic - the whole of Berlin was under Four Power occupation not just West Berlin. The 3 western powers ran their sections as one unit, as they did (for most purposes) their parts of the rest of Germany; but all 4 powers had rights in all sectors of Berlin. Personnel from the 3 western powers, for example, had right of entry to the Soviet sector ("East Berlin"), even though Germans from West Berlin didn't.

And yes, of course, since West Berlin was a separate legal entity from the three western parts of the rest of Germany, it wasn't the capital of the Federal Republic (constituted of those three parts), but the capital was in Bonn instead.

 

[Cloud Strife]

To be even more pedantic - the whole of Berlin was under Four Power occupation not just West Berlin.

Yes, absolutely, that's what I meant - the city as a whole was occupied, and remained that way throughout the Cold War. I believe though, that the Western Allies ended their occupation in 1955 of West Germany. There's a school of thought that says that West Germany was never fully sovereign, but I'm not aware of any official moves to exert control of West Germany. In comparison, I believe the Soviets never officially declared their occupation of East Germany to be over until they signed the 4+2 Agreement.

Readers might also be surprised to learn that Vienna was also under similar division after the war, along with Austria as a whole.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Yes, absolutely, that's what I meant - the city as a whole was occupied, and remained that way throughout the Cold War. I believe though, that the Western Allies ended their occupation in 1955 of West Germany. There's a school of thought that says that West Germany was never fully sovereign, but I'm not aware of any official moves to exert control of West Germany. In comparison, I believe the Soviets never officially declared their occupation of East Germany to be over until they signed the 4+2 Agreement.

The western powers retained their nominal occupying status in West Germany until the end of the Cold War, since it was they (and not "West Germany") who had the transit rights which enabled travel and trade between West Germany and West Berlin. The troops from western countries in West Germany, which started out as occupiers, morphed into allies when West Germany joined the NATO alliance in 1955. No doubt a bit weird for some of the troops there.

Readers might also be surprised to learn that Vienna was also under similar division after the war, along with Austria as a whole.

Not readers who stayed awake in their lessons at school...

 

[Austriantrain]

Readers might also be surprised to learn that Vienna was also under similar division after the war, along with Austria as a whole.

Austria was very lucky though that all 4 occupying powers agreed to leave in 1955, formally ending the occupation. We might very well have ended up with an „East Austria“ and an „East Vienna“ as well.

 

[oldman]

Not readers who stayed awake in their lessons at school...

Nor those who have seen The Third Man (one of my favourite films).

 

[30907]

Not readers who stayed awake in their lessons at school...

History O-level ended in 1914 for me and 1939 for my wife - and we are about 5 years to young to remember 1955 news stories

 

[dutchflyer]

Back to MOCKBA -or Moscow for most here:
in the days of yore, when it was of course the capital of the real existing socialist world, it did have at least a weekly (SPY) direct train/wagons to every EUR capital, except for obvious reasons, its disciple Tirana.
Since the Empire broke up and it became ROssye=Russia, it -at least pre-covid- most of these to west-EUR vanished, no more spies and secret ´diplomatic´ mails to send, but it kept its since then international broad gauge links to all capitals of the run-away former provinces, now independent states.
That makes for Tallinn-Riga-Vilnius-Minsk-Kyiv-Chisinau-Tbilisi-Yerevan-Baky-Tashkent-Almaty-Dushanbe-+Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. But this happy state did not last long-all kinds of local strife so GEorgia-Armenija were severed and after that more. Ulan Baatar, Beijing and for a while also PyongYang kept in. They had to withdraw from Afghanistan before the railway could be built-it reaches, AFAIK, a few KMs inland there though.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Nor those who have seen The Third Man (one of my favourite films).

Ah yes - I can hear that zither now...

 

[Taunton]

The Soviet Union was, at least according to its own laws, a union of multiple independent republics, each of which had its own capital and parliament. Russia was the largest, but the various independent countries nowadays that dropped out of the Soviet Union were regarded at least within the USSR as independent - it was just they had "volunteered" many of their powers to the union. Russia is still referred to by Russians as the "Russian Federation", where the likes of Tatarstan (capital Kazan, served by train from Moscow) are regarded as independent, a bit like England-Wales. Not only that, but a series of even more ephemeral republics, often based on an ethnic background, were created within Russia. There were several along the Trans-Siberian railway.

In the USA an airline, United Airlines, set out in I think the 1980s to fly to all 50 US states, but defined this as going to "the largest metropolitan area" within each state, rather than necessarily its capital. Like various places around the world, US state capitals are commonly not the largest city there. The airline attempt was a financial failure, and they shut down several of them quite quickly again.

 

[AlbertBeale]

The Soviet Union was, at least according to its own laws, a union of multiple independent republics, each of which had its own capital and parliament. Russia was the largest, but the various independent countries nowadays that dropped out of the Soviet Union were regarded at least within the USSR as independent - it was just they had "volunteered" many of their powers to the union. Russia is still referred to by Russians as the "Russian Federation", where the likes of Tatarstan (capital Kazan, served by train from Moscow) are regarded as independent, a bit like England-Wales. Not only that, but a series of even more ephemeral republics, often based on an ethnic background, were created within Russia. There were several along the Trans-Siberian railway.

I think the point is that the current Russian Federation includes somewhat autonomous areas that are nevertheless part of Russia. (Cf Vojvodina and Kosova within Serbia, which were autonomous regions of Serbia and not distinct from Serbia in the way the other 5 constituent republics within Yugoslavia were.) But the Soviet Union included other republics (eg Ukraine and the 3 Baltic States) besides Russia; they were separate to the extent that a couple of them had separate representation at the UN [though I think this was partly a historical anomaly on account of the messy way the UN was set up].

 

[70014IronDuke]

.... But the Soviet Union included other republics (eg Ukraine and the 3 Baltic States) besides Russia; they were separate to the extent that a couple of them had separate representation at the UN [though I think this was partly a historical anomaly on account of the messy way the UN was set up].

Not as I understand it, no. Stalin used the pretext that Ukraine and Belarus were somehow 'independent' states simply to get two extra votes in the UN when it was formed in ... post WW2.

Tough luck on Russian nationalists - it came back to bite them when, as the USSR fell apart, these two wanted to exercise their supposed Soviet 'right' to independence to actually do so.

The incorporation of the Baltic states into the USSR was never, of course, recognised by the western allies.

 

[Calthrop]

Not readers who stayed awake in their lessons at school...

@oldman says: Nor those who have seen The Third Man...


I can be a world-champion bore about my favourite book, Bryan Morgan's The End of the Line: it's from that, that I first became aware of the situation which obtained in Austria 1945 - 55. The book's Austria chapter mentions -- pretty much in passing, and in a matter-of-fact way; only briefly touching on unattainable potentially good stuff -- the northern-and-eastern part of the country, including the capital, being Soviet-occupied and thus off limits to Western enthusiasts. The book was actually published in 1955: so Morgan's travels in the earlier 1950s, which furnished his material for the book, would have been prior to Austria's "de-occupying" and reunification.

 

[70014IronDuke]

@oldman says: Nor those who have seen The Third Man...


I can be a world-champion bore about my favourite book, Bryan Morgan's The End of the Line: it's from that, that I first became aware of the situation which obtained in Austria 1945 - 55. The book's Austria chapter mentions -- pretty much in passing, and in a matter-of-fact way; only briefly touching on unattainable potentially good stuff -- the northern-and-eastern part of the country, including the capital, being Soviet-occupied and thus off limits to Western enthusiasts. The book was actually published in 1955: so Morgan's travels in the earlier 1950s, which furnished his material for the book, would have been prior to Austria's "de-occupying" and reunification.

One of the (for me) great advantages of being a railway/steam - photographer/enthusiast back at the end of steam in the UK and taking up the quest of chasing steam on the European continent is that it took one to places few others travelled.

Thus it was that I ventured to Nieder Osterreich in 1972-3. It was certainly a long time after Bryan Morgan, of that there is no doubt, but - and I hope I am not allowing historical knowledge gained later to cloud my memories - but even in 1973, that is 18 years after the Soviet withdrawal from the region north of Vienna, one could still feel the presence of this occupation.

The country people were also amazingly friendly: I would be walking down a road into a village after trying to photograph an OBB 2-8-2T (was it the 91 class? Or 93?) on some vague branch line working and some 55-year old local would spend 2 minutes asking who the heck I was before inviting me in for coffee or Spritze - and maybe a sandwich or lunch.

I am sure that today, these areas are mostly absorbed by the Vienna agglomeration and have become immune to the odd stranger, but back then, they retained their provincial roots, and a foreigner wandering into their midst was, once 'cleared' as ok, was very much welcomed.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

So, was part of Oesterreich developing like the DDR until 1955, with attempts to collectivise agriculture for example?

 

[AlbertBeale]

Not as I understand it, no. Stalin used the pretext that Ukraine and Belarus were somehow 'independent' states simply to get two extra votes in the UN when it was formed in ... post WW2.

Tough luck on Russian nationalists - it came back to bite them when, as the USSR fell apart, these two wanted to exercise their supposed Soviet 'right' to independence to actually do so.

The incorporation of the Baltic states into the USSR was never, of course, recognised by the western allies.

My understanding is that when the USSR was set up and the borders between Russia and other constituent republics were (eventually) settled, the areas put in the non-Russian republics were (for both political and administrative reasons) treated somewhat expansively. Given that the non-Russian republics were to be officially bilingual in Russian and the local language, and that in many cases there wasn't a sudden switch of language communities at one point on the map (ie there was likely to be a gradual transition from majority-other-language areas to majority-Russian-language areas) then the border was drawn so that most of the minority language speakers were inside the "other" republic, even though that meant including areas which were majority Russian speaking. This meant that almost everyone had their own language as the official language or one of the official languages of the administrative area they lived in, and avoided needing significant bilingual local government within Russia itself. So when the USSR split up, some of the seceding republics ended up including areas which were outside their "traditional" or "historical" boundaries, with lots of Russian speakers inside the new countries. (In the case of Crimea, this was moved from being in the Russian Soviet Republic to being in the Ukrainian Soviet Republic only after the second World war - it wasn't historically part of Ukraine; this puts an interesting spin on its [re-]incorporation into Russia in recent years.)

I accept, of course, that the situation isn't the same for all former Soviet republics; what I've set out here is only part of the story.

 

[Caboose Class]

Post-WW2 partition of Austria
Here is a map showing how the country was partitioned from 1945 to 1955

Vienna (like Berlin) was also partitioned between the four Allied powers:-

Here are some interesting photos from that time:-
https://www.rferl.org/a/the-soviet-...-stalin-was-displayed-in-vienna/29650016.html

 

[70014IronDuke]

My understanding is that when the USSR was set up and the borders between Russia and other constituent republics were (eventually) settled, the areas put in the non-Russian republics were (for both political and administrative reasons) treated somewhat expansively. Given that the non-Russian republics were to be officially bilingual in Russian and the local language, and that in many cases there wasn't a sudden switch of language communities at one point on the map (ie there was likely to be a gradual transition from majority-other-language areas to majority-Russian-language areas) then the border was drawn so that most of the minority language speakers were inside the "other" republic, even though that meant including areas which were majority Russian speaking. This meant that almost everyone had their own language as the official language or one of the official languages of the administrative area they lived in, and avoided needing significant bilingual local government within Russia itself. So when the USSR split up, some of the seceding republics ended up including areas which were outside their "traditional" or "historical" boundaries, with lots of Russian speakers inside the new countries. (In the case of Crimea, this was moved from being in the Russian Soviet Republic to being in the Ukrainian Soviet Republic only after the second World war - it wasn't historically part of Ukraine; this puts an interesting spin on its [re-]incorporation into Russia in recent years.)

I accept, of course, that the situation isn't the same for all former Soviet republics; what I've set out here is only part of the story.

I suspect you know a lot more about this "settling down" of the USSR in the 1920s than I do. Well, in truth, I know b-all about that.
I was just referring to the reason why Ukraine and Belarus got seats (and votes) at the UN. This, of course begs the question: why didn't Uncle Joe fight to get more Soviet republics seats at the same body?

So, was part of Oesterreich developing like the DDR until 1955, with attempts to collectivise agriculture for example?

In truth, that's a very good question. The only snippet of info on it that I have is I remember being told that the Austrians nationalised their banks to avoid the Soviets taking all the money. But how true that is, I don't know. I mean, the Soviets took what they wanted from most places that they occupied, and what would nationalisation do to stop them on this point?

I shall have to ask my Austrian friends about this. Thank you for raising the subject.

Musing on - possibly, just possibly, the Soviets/Stalin bought the Zita-Austrian, later Sound-of-Music spin that it had been an occupied country, and was not therefore a 'proper' enemy of the Soviet people - but that seems highly unlikely. In any case, nobody told the Red Army soldiers that as the raped and pillaged Vienna once they occupied the city.

Then, of course, there is the (almost) unprecedented voluntary withdrawal from Austria by the Soviets in 1955. Moscow certainly seemed to view Austria surprisingly and unchararcteristically less brutally compared to anywhere else - certainly compared to the defeated Germany.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Post-WW2 partition of Austria
Here is a map showing how the country was partitioned from 1945 to 1955
View attachment 106952
Vienna (like Berlin) was also partitioned between the four Allied powers:-
View attachment 106953
Here are some interesting photos from that time:-
https://www.rferl.org/a/the-soviet-...-stalin-was-displayed-in-vienna/29650016.html

It's noteworthy that the areas of Vienna controlled by each of the 4 powers were district by district, but not (all) contiguous - unlike Berlin, where it was a simpler geographical division. Perhaps the occupation of Austria wasn't treated by the occupiers - or at least not by all of them - as being likely to go on for a very long time, in the way that the occupation of Germany might have been envisaged.

Then, of course, there is the (almost) unprecedented voluntary withdrawal from Austria by the Soviets in 1955. Moscow certainly seemed to view Austria surprisingly and unchararcteristically less brutally compared to anywhere else - certainly compared to the defeated Germany.

I wonder whether the Soviet willingness to agree to the ending of the occupation of Austria related to the division into "spheres of influence" at Yalta? Austria wasn't included in the eastern areas of Europe that were accepted as being due to be primarily Soviet-influenced (or -dominated) post WW2. Also, the withdrawal of the occupiers from Austria was on the basis of a treaty that insisted on the country's neutrality, precluding it from being a member of NATO. (Though Austrian forces have been involved in some NATO-led "peace keeping" missions, albeit as a non-member.)

 

[Iskra]

Back to MOCKBA -or Moscow for most here:
in the days of yore, when it was of course the capital of the real existing socialist world, it did have at least a weekly (SPY) direct train/wagons to every EUR capital, except for obvious reasons, its disciple Tirana.
Since the Empire broke up and it became ROssye=Russia, it -at least pre-covid- most of these to west-EUR vanished, no more spies and secret ´diplomatic´ mails to send, but it kept its since then international broad gauge links to all capitals of the run-away former provinces, now independent states.
That makes for Tallinn-Riga-Vilnius-Minsk-Kyiv-Chisinau-Tbilisi-Yerevan-Baky-Tashkent-Almaty-Dushanbe-+Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. But this happy state did not last long-all kinds of local strife so GEorgia-Armenija were severed and after that more. Ulan Baatar, Beijing and for a while also PyongYang kept in. They had to withdraw from Afghanistan before the railway could be built-it reaches, AFAIK, a few KMs inland there though.

I think you mean Communist. There has never been a socialist state. Plenty of states have said they are socialist, but none have actually achieved it.

 

[Morgsie]

I know of about the divisions of Vienna and Austria/Osterriech but do not know the ins and outs spefics etc. I know a lot about Germany not just the Cold War like the divisions, the Berlin Wall etc but I covered as part of my Politics Degree the formation of the West German State in 1949, the institutions designed including the Basic Law or Grundgestez (Chancellor, President, Bundestag, Bundesrat, the Federal Consitutional Court, Federalism, Electoral System and Political Parties) which was seen as provisional or interim, the original version included 2 provisions as to future reunification, Article 23 which was used by Saar in the 1950s to join the West German State and Article 146 which is drafting a new Constitution. Also learnt about the Re-Unifation process. If my memory serves me correctly prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall, many East Germans could travel to West Germany via Austria as the borders were opened?

Also as part of my degree I learnt the formation of NATO and the establishment of the EU,The European Coal and Steel Comunity ECSC, the proposed European Defence Community which failed due to the French National Assembly or Assembee nationale voting against, the Treatyof Rome and all developments since.

 

[Busaholic]

History O-level ended in 1914 for me and 1939 for my wife - and we are about 5 years to young to remember 1955 news stories

Didn't do History O-level, but my A-level sat in 1966 ended in 1914 except for the Russian Revolution of 1917! Some of our teachers had served in the army during the Second World War, including one who'd been tortured by the Japanese and still bore the obvious physical scars. I for one could absolutely see why World War Two could not be studied dispassionately then in a classroom setting: it was still too raw!

 

[Gloster]

My O-Level in 1976 ended in 1815, although there were other curriculums with the same examination board that went up to the Crimean War. We might have had a problem with one of the senior history masters who was not a Nazi, that would be too strong, but expressed admiration for certain aspects of their rule, particularly ‘bringing a sense of order’ to the country. He also seemed to agree with their attitudes about trade unions and left-wingers.

 

[TheEdge]

My A level in 2009 finished up with 1939. GCSE course had finished by 1945. So this period of history was very uncovered.

 

[Peterthegreat]

I know of about the divisions of Vienna and Austria/Osterriech but do not know the ins and outs spefics etc. I know a lot about Germany not just the Cold War like the divisions, the Berlin Wall etc but I covered as part of my Politics Degree the formation of the West German State in 1949, the institutions designed including the Basic Law or Grundgestez (Chancellor, President, Bundestag, Bundesrat, the Federal Consitutional Court, Federalism, Electoral System and Political Parties) which was seen as provisional or interim, the original version included 2 provisions as to future reunification, Article 23 which was used by Saar in the 1950s to join the West German State and Article 146 which is drafting a new Constitution. Also learnt about the Re-Unifation process. If my memory serves me correctly prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall, many East Germans could travel to West Germany via Austria as the borders were opened?

Also as part of my degree I learnt the formation of NATO and the establishment of the EU,The European Coal and Steel Comunity ECSC, the proposed European Defence Community which failed due to the French National Assembly or Assembee nationale voting against, the Treatyof Rome and all developments since.

It was the opening of the border between Hungary and Austria which allowed East Germans to reach West Germany.

 

[Bevan Price]

For many practical purposes, after WW2, countries such as East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, etc. were effectively Russian colonies, with no rights to independent policies .

 

[70014IronDuke]

It was the opening of the border between Hungary and Austria which allowed East Germans to reach West Germany.

This is correct. And, for a limited number of trains, the opening of the Czech border for those east Germans who'd opted to sit it out in the gardens of the west German embassy in Prague in the summer of 1989. Otherwise, E Germans were allowed free travel to CZ and Hungary, but were not normally granted visas to visit Austria into and including 1989, to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Gloster]

The East German authorities, rather (all right, very) cynically, would allow those too old to work to cross to the West, knowing that Bonn would then support them. The East could thus avoid paying their pensions, medical care, etc.

 

[Calthrop]

The East German authorities, rather (all right, very) cynically, would allow those too old to work to cross to the West, knowing that Bonn would then support them. The East could thus avoid paying their pensions, medical care, etc.

Hence the joke which was current in East Germany; Q: What is the longest river in the world? A: The Elbe -- because it takes sixty-five years to get from Dresden to Hamburg.