This is the last of Churchill's volumes on WWII. This one had a different tone than the other ones. Perhaps because the issues in this volume had not been resolved at the time of writing, or perhaps because Churchill himself was disappointed at how things ultimately turned out (apart from winning the war that is). The theme of this volume is telling: How the great democracies triumphed, and so were able to resume the follies which had so nearly cost them their life.Not bitter about being kicked out of office as soon as the war was over, is he?Because this book opened with D-Day, Hitler was soon reduced to a paper villain, unimportant because his fall was inevitable. The real evil of the time was Stalin. Even if you add all the fatalities of WWII at Hitler's feet, Stalin still killed more people. He was shrewd, cunning and a virtuoso at public appearances. He could lie to your face and smile. He openly called for the underground of Warsaw to rebel against the Germans, then left his armies 10 miles away until they had all been slaughtered to enter the city. Though it trivializes the war a bit, the image that keeps coming to mind is Hitler's Count Dooku to Stalin's Darth Sidious.The present ineffectual design of the United Nations is the result of maneuvering to get Russia to join it. Field Marshall Smuts, who was tasked with finding a compromise that Russia would accept in forming the UN, optimistically wrote to Churchill, The principle of unanimity will at the worse only have the effect of a veto, or stopping action where it may be wise, or even necessary. Its effect will be negative; it will retard action. But it will also render it impossible for Russia to embark on courses not approved of by the USA and the United Kingdom.Russia soon proved that it would do as it liked and operated through its proxy states, even as early as before the Germans capitulated. Marshall Tito nearly got into open combat with Allied soldiers over the Italian port of Trieste, even though they were supposedly on the same side. When Churchill asked Stalin to reign in his underling, Stalin denied he had any influence over Tito at all.It didn't help that France was actively empire-building and resisting all calls to free Syria and other held possessions and Greece was close to anarchy, with only British troops able to keep the peace. I think Churchill felt the war had only been paused and forsaw a rapid decline into anarchy with Russia a vulture, eager to devour the spoils.Though the death of Roosevelt and Churchill's loss of political power enabled Stalin to set up puppet states all through eastern Europe, the Iron Curtain (Churchill coined the phrase) did not result in another world war. I think Churchill would have been surprised that the ideological conflict between democracy and communism never erupted into more than regional conflicts.Through all of his distrust of Stalin, he was still as swayed by the dictator's personal magnetism as any. At the meeting where Truman told Stalin of the atomic bomb, Churchill reports, "I was certain that at that date Stalin had no special knowledge of the vast process of research upon which the united States and Britain had been engaged for so long." We know now that Stalin knew all about it. He had a spy at Los Alamos for years.It is intriguing to think what would have happened if during the post-war negotiations, the Conservative party had stayed in office. The animosity between the US and USSR that developed would have been shared more equally by Great Britain it is almost certain.
The final volume of Churchill's incredible history of WW II. There's absolutely nothing else like it, and he turns in another masterpiece. The things people quote most often are his bitterness about being voted out of office just as the war is ending, and Stalin's bare-faced lies concerning the atom bomb. He claimed to know nothing about it, which Churchill believed, but it later turned out that he'd had a spy in place who'd passed out all the secrets. But here's the bit that made the greatest impression on me. The British strategy has finally come to fruition. Way back in Volume II, Churchill made an brilliantly prescient decision: rather than going into a defensive huddle and putting everything into defending Britain from the impending German invasion, he diverted resources to hold Egypt. He wanted the possibility of counter-attacking later on. We did indeed win the Battle of Britain, and we also kept Egypt. Then we marched across North Africa, won the Battle of El Alamein in Volume IV, took Tunis, and invaded Sicily. After that, we fought all the way up Italy and finally forced the remnants of the Axis forces to surrender there in late April, 1945. Simultaneously, Germany was falling to a combined onslaught from Soviet, US and British forces. It was clear that the end was very near there too. The question was what to do with the newly victorious army that was sitting at the top of Italy. Churchill argued that they should turn East. He could already see that Eastern Europe was going to be carved up between Soviet and Anglo-American forces, and he wanted to get as large a slice as possible. But Eisenhower didn't like this. He felt that it sent a bad signal to our Soviet allies, and he decided to go West instead, to mop up the last pockets of resistance in Southern France. It turned out that this was the wrong call. As Churchill bitterly complains, if only they had taken his advice then a substantial amount of Eastern Europe would have avoided becoming Soviet satellite states for the next 50 years.With hindsight, it's clear that Stalin would never stay allied to the US and Britain longer than necessary. As soon as Germany, their common enemy, was out of the picture, he had no reason to do so. Loyalty wasn't an important concept to him. Unfortunately, this wasn't obvious at the time.It's very difficult to understand that your key ally is just about to become your enemy and will ruthlessly exploit your naive trust. Tragedy indeed.
What do You think about Triumph And Tragedy (2008)?
Winston Churchill found himself with a lot of time on his hands at the end of the war. Part of his personal tragedy was to suddenly discover, not long after the fall of Berlin but before the bombs fell on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that he was no longer wanted by the British electorate. That is how "Triumph and Tragedy" ends, with a personal note of sourness, although with little explanation as to the why and wherefore of his own political demise. The truth lay perhaps in the real nature of the man. Recognised as the bulldog who could do a lot more than bark in a War Cabinet, he was called for at once when it was clear that Britain was in danger. Yet so well-known were his qualities as a fighter of men that, once peace was about to return, he was dispatched back to political oblivion as being obviously the wrong man to continue. Such is democracy. I've no doubt he felt a little twinge, as many a soldier at the front also paradoxically felt, that his war was over.Churchill was probably without equal during his own lifetime and, by the curious twists of fate which manage men, was one of the most extraordinary players on the world stage, throughout recorded history. The last sentence in the book nevertheless shows the true heart of a man who, whatever else may be said about him, gave so much:"It only remains for me to express to the British people, for whom I have acted in these perilous years, my profound gratitude for the unflinching, unswerving support which they have given me during my task, and for the many expressions of kindness which they have shown towards their servant."
—Owen
Finally, I managed to finish all 6 volumes of Churchill's account of World War III came upon this books on an Amazon sale, been for some time interested on reading them and couln't resist the urge. Took me around 8-9 months to finish them all.The overall series of books I would rate as 4 start. I found it to be novel (lol) way to read about WWII. Basically Churchill follows events by commenting on his conversations, and mail exchange with military and political leaders. The fact that you get to read this exchange is very enlightening. I found for example the changes in tone of Stalin's telegrams, from combative, to friendly and finally cool and distant as the battle fron evolves. It is also interesting to see how the leaders of the time saw the struggle, how importat points were sometimes overlooked, and how apparent minor things were to have a major impact later on. As from a military point of view, is interesting to see how the Air Power came to be, and evolved during the war. It was an element that did not play a significant part in the Great War, but was to be decisive on WWII. The battle of London could be a turning point on the whole war, as the Luftwafe lost initiative afterwards. From a political point of view is also interesting to see the birth of the UN, from one of it's main proponents, and see how it has (or not) achieved the original goals.As for negative elements, is quite clear the position Churchill had about Communism and that paints his later conversations with Stalin. Is also to be noted that this was written as a bit of political marketing, and one can see how he tried to direct negative comments towards the Labour/socialist party, at least as regarding to the events previous to WWII. Also the whole secret war, spionage and the work on th Enigma code was absent from this account.At the end is a very personal tale, albeit one from the top, of the times and events leading and during WWII. As an aficionado for history, it was a great an interesting reading, and if you have a particular interest for history or WWII it makes a nice complement to your other readings.
—Julián Arce Sanchez
This was one of the better series of books I've read about the WWII. Churchill had a unique perspective on the subject and I suppose that makes him one of the better tale tellers. The only thing that I find humorous about his writing is that he seems to under-emphasize the part that Patton had to play during the war. Like all Brits he is a diehard Montgomery advocate. I don't blame him, but he could have been more objective about the Patton. I still liked the series and am very glad I read them back to back!
—Kory Klimoski
