Controversial Heritage: An Approach to Racism from the Land of Black Pete

In the eyes of foreigners, the Netherlands has a controversial tradition. Every autumn an old man named Sinterklaas (a figure based on Saint Nicholas, patron saint of children and one of the sources of the popular Christmas icon of Santa Claus) with a staff, a miter and a long beard arrives in the Netherlands on a steamboat accompanied by dozens of servants, called zwarte pieten (Black Petes). These Petes have traditionally been painted black, have bright red lips, gold earrings, and curly hair. Black Pete hands out sweets and presents to children. To outsiders this whole tradition has an obvious stereotypical racist character, but for many Dutch people it is an innocent tradition: they say this has nothing to do with racism. In the last ten years in particular there has been increasing criticism of the racist character of Black Pete, both from minority groups within the country and from abroad. This is a very delicate situation in the generally liberal and tolerant Netherlands. Fierce discussions and demonstrations by supporters and opponents characterize the past ten years. Why is this tradition so highly valued and how should it continue?

Bram Peters explains.

Illustration from Jan Schenkman's book Sint Nikolaas en zijn Knecht (Saint Nicholas and his Servant).

Although Sinterklaas is a tradition for children, it’s always the adults who say Black Pete must stay black, not the children. This has to do with the fact that adults have an image from their youth of what Black Pete should look like. Children don’t have those memories. And that’s why it’s so sensitive. Adults feel that a tradition they have only fond childhood memories of may not be passed onto the next generation. Their tradition is under pressure to change and that hurts. Every survey shows that it is mainly older Dutch people who want to stick to the traditional appearance of Black Pete. Younger generations are more open to change.

Over the past ten years you can see that the annual recurring discussion is starting to influence public opinion. The number of Dutch people who are in favor of the traditional Black Pete decreases a little every year, but it is going slowly. International events also influence this shift, for example UN researcher Verene Sheperd’s criticism of the Dutch tradition in 2013 and the worldwide Black Lives Matter protests following the death of George Floyd in 2020. Slowly the tradition is changing: every year more Black Petes appear with only some soot smudges on the face rather than full blackface. Other Petes are painted in all kinds of colors.

When something is part of your own culture and tradition, it can be very difficult to understand that it can be hurtful to others. Something that is perceived as racist by others cannot be easily understood for people for whom it is part of their identity. There seems to be a blind spot. In addition, we live in a time when the world is changing rapidly. Globalization, migration and the rise of the internet and social media mean everyone is connected to everyone and old habits and customs are constantly under discussion. Many people experience a loss of identity and tend to cling to the old. Polarization is the result. It is more important than ever to keep in touch with each other and really understand why one wants change and why that change takes time for the other.

Global discussions

Similar discussions about racist heritage are also present in other countries. Take for example the situation in the United States, where statues of so-called Civil War “heroes” such as General Robert Lee are removed and the use of the Confederate flag on government buildings and other locations has become highly controversial. The statues and flag are widely seen by minority groups as symbols of slavery and oppression. And they find the majority of historians on their side. For white residents of the southern states, the situation is sometimes more nuanced. They see these symbols as part of their past and heritage and do not necessarily associate them with racism. The aforementioned blind spot seems to be present here too because most of these people aren’t white power supremacists. It is essential that this group enters the dialogue with the group that do find these symbols racist, even if one may not be used to talk with the other. This will help to get a better mutual understanding and hopefully accomplish a re-evaluation of the controversial heritage that simply exists, even if it will take time. And to make a stand together against the white power movement that is not only openly racist but is even proud of it and cannot be reasoned with.

What do you think about re-evaluating controversial heritage? Let us know below.

About the author: Bram Peters is an historian from the Netherlands. He has a MA in political history from one of the major Dutch universities, and specialized in national identity and traditions, as well as parliamentary history, the second world war and war propaganda. He worked for years as a curator at one of the largest war museums in the Netherlands. He likes to get involved in public debate by writing articles for national and regional newspapers and websites.

How Florida was Mapped: The First Survey of Coral Springs

Coral Springs is located in Florida, just north of Miami. It has seen its population boom in the post-war years. Here, Karl Miller looks at how the mapping of Florida took place in the 19th century - and how the area was formed in the 20th century.

The Coral Springs covered bridge, an old building in the city. Source: Legionaries, available here.

Like many cities formed during the rise of suburbia in post-World War II America, Coral Springs, Florida expanded extremely rapidly. Founded in 1963, it grew from just 1,489 residents in 1970 to over 134,394 in 2020, becoming one of the largest fifteen municipalities in Florida. Also like many other new American cities, its story started well before incorporation.

For over a thousand years, Tequesta natives occupied the area that would eventually become Coral Springs. Archaeological digs showed several areas of native occupation including camps and burial sites, ending when the last of the tribe, decimated by European disease, departed for Cuba in 1763. While Seminole natives and others likely crossed through the area in the decades after the Tequesta left, the first recorded visit to the future area of Coral Springs did not come until long after the Tequesta departed.

Upon receiving Florida from Spain by the treaty of Adams-Onis in 1819, the United States began to organize the territory they had acquired. Starting with the Land Ordinance Act of 1785, the United States adopted a common system, the Rectangular Method, for measuring land. Starting from a designated point called a meridian, the new territory was divided north and south into 36-square-mile blocks called townships that were further measured east and west by ranges. Measured from a meridian established at Tallahassee, the land that would eventually become Coral Springs sat at Township 48 South, Range 41 East.

Working through the swamps

George MacKay, a 35-year-old New York surveyor who had moved to Florida to conduct various business interests, was hired by the United States Surveyor General’s Office in 1845 to conduct surveying work in the southeastern part of the state. Valentine Y. Conway,  the Surveyor General of Florida, instructed MacKay to survey land south of Township 44 “to the Atlantic coast, and as far west as practicable.” Using a magnetic compass and a surveyor’s chain which was  specified to be “33 feet in length . . . containing 50 links . . . made of good iron wire,” MacKay’s team – which included his younger brother Alexander as well as several enslaved persons -  proceeded to work their way through the south Florida swamps, enduring the insects, heat, snakes, and alligators that the profession routinely experienced at that time.

On March 26, 1845, MacKay surveyed the area in which the future Coral Springs would sit. His brief survey notes show he found a rocky area with “scrub pine, cypress . . . and sawgrass.”  In a later account of his surveying expedition, MacKay described the conditions they encountered, stating often the weather was so still “there was not enough air stirring to move as aspen leaf” and that their measuring lines could only pass in places “by cutting away the lofty fresh grass and wading (or rather wallowing) through the mud and underrubbish.”  

Having completing his assigned survey, MacKay, after going on a difficult trip in which his boat “was driven back to New River two or three times by contrary wind, turned in his report to the Surveyor General’s headquarters in St. Augustine.”  Based on his account showing 888.6 miles surveyed, he was paid $3,555.  He eventually moved back to Caledonia, New York, where he died in 1880.

Growth

The land itself remained isolated for several more decades, until the state government sold it as part of a grant to speculator Richard Bolles in 1908. After the draining of south Florida swamps began in earnest under Governor Napoleon Bonaparte Broward, the land was acquired by Henry “Bud” Lyons in 1919 as part of his 20,000-acre green bean and cattle operation. In 1961, Lyons’ widow sold the land to developer James S. Hunt for $1 million, setting the stage for Coral Springs to be incorporated two years later.

As a case study in the growth of suburban America, the surveying expedition that first reached the area of the future Coral Springs illustrates a typical first step in development. It illustrates how a city can quickly go from an undeveloped natural setting to a major suburban municipality in only a few short decades. While in a sense this example shows the triumph of progress, it is also a cautionary story in that the path to rapid development came at the cost of destroying extensive areas of pristine wetlands and wildlife habitat. When faced with a similar situation in the future, hopefully a more balanced, deliberate outcome will result.

What do you think of the development of Florida? Let us know below.

1 U.S. Census Bureau, “Characteristics of the Population: Florida,” 1970, accessed January 15, 2022 at https://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1970a_fl1-01.pdf;  U.S. Census Bureau, “QuickFacts: Coral Springs, FL,” 2020, accessed January 15, 2022 at https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/coralspringscityflorida.

2 Joe Knetsch, "The Surveys of George Mackay: A Drawer of Lines on the Map of South Florida," The Florida

Surveyor, Vol. II, Issue 1 (October 1994).

3 C. Albert White, A History of the Rectangular Survey System (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1983): 332, accessed December 20, 2021 at https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/histrect.pdf, 332.

4 U.S. Government Survey Field Notebooks, Vol. 84, 1845: 283, accessed October 13, 2021 at https://ftp.labins.org/glo_all/Volume84_pdf/Folder%2013%20pg%20262%20to%20285_pdf.pdf.

5 Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1896): 261, accessed November 20, 2021 at https://www.google.com/books/edition/Annual_Report_of_the_Board_of_Regents_of/Lt1f3-7J2xcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=weathermaking+ancient+and+modern+smithsonian+mackay&pg=PA260&printsec=frontcover.

6 A.H. Jones.  A.H. Jones to George MacKay, February 2, 1846. Letter. MacKay-Hutchinson Family Papers 1836-74, Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, The University of Texas at Austin.

7 U.S. Treasury Department, Letter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting the annual report of the Commissioner of the General Land Office: 112, accessed December 21, 2021 at https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1607&context=indianserialset. 

8 New York, Death Index, 1880-1956, New York Department of Health, Albany, NY; NY State Death Index; Certificate Number 5870.

From American Reconstruction to the McDonaldization of Society

 American has seen so many changes since the end of the US Civil War in 1865. Here, Daniel L. Smith discusses some key trends that have happened since then, ultimately leading to the so-called ‘McDonaldization’ of Society.

Daniel’s book on mid-19th century northern California is now available. Find our more here: Amazon US | Amazon UK

George Ritzer who wrote The McDonaldization of Society in 1993. Source: available here.

Rationality and logic were broken well before the 2000s and even before the 1960s. In fact, it was during the Reconstruction-era after the American Civil War that things fell apart quickly. Specifically, between 1863 and 1877. This was the catalyst for how American society would form as we see it today. During the Reconstruction-era, historical process was coming into play, such as the country adjusting the deconstruction of institutional slavery, as well as the security of our country’s unity as one – both outcomes of the Civil War. If it were not for a pardon from treason that was handed over to the Confederate generals and politicians after Lincoln was assassinated, I observe and stand on conscience that our nation would have looked much different today. I mean that politically and culturally. 

Of course with advancement of society came cooperation with differing minority groups. A differing narrative stayed alive in the black communities. By the 1930s, Southern Democratic politics had been changed. These politicians and business elites began to shift their views to how “interracial cooperation” could bring them success in the 1900s South.[1] Politics at this point and time begin to change rapidly with the introduction of industrialization. Skyscrapers would start to emerge. Entertainment became higher priority. And self-gratification such as at restaurants, movies, food, and alcohol, began to be in excess for all those who hung onto their traditional American roots.

Consumer culture

In the 1930s consumer culture was a tied knot of pestering and arrogance. Many of those at that time would begin to condemn mass-culture, which began to be viewed as fun, with an insistence on freedom for self-expression. Mainstream society began to view it as an antisocial counterculture. Critics of the consumer culture were easily characterized as “Puritan” in their own personal views on this way of life. So, we end up in the 1960s where the societal revolution would really take off. Media and corporate entities would help fast-forward this social revolution in America. The “permissiveness” of 1960s culture would be countered itself by the return of traditional religion in America.

McDonaldization

There has always been a “see-saw” like effect throughout politics and religion in history. If you pay attention to current events, you observe this. From watching the news, to social media, to living your daily lives – everybody sees the fallout from America’s fracture of the founders’ ideals. Most do not know that, but most also see it happening right in front of their own eyes. Think, Skid Row in Los Angeles, California. Tent city. The homeless empire.[2] 

This brings me to how professor and author George Ritzer came up with the clever slogan, “The McDonaldization of Society.” So here we are. We live in a society where a poll of elementary school children in 1986 concluded that 96% of them could identify Ronald McDonald over Santa Claus in name recognition.[3] Mind blowing to think that today it’s even worse. And on many differing levels. Social media, video games, movies. Everything today is on overdrive. But I digress to make the point that the McDonaldization of society, that is, creating an atmosphere of instant gratification, has caused a shift in how Americans live their lives today.

Ultimately, the McDonaldization of society was the turning point in how the entire world would come to learn and live in their daily lives. Someone once said, “The founding fathers would be turning over in their graves right now.” Well, I agree. With education being placed on the backburner by the elites in business and in government, can we pull ourselves into a new way of coping with post-modern America? 

To sum it all up, there has been much change from Reconstruction to our current post-Modern America. Yes. Many historians clarify our current era as post-Modern America. Today, we are living in a new world. Many nations across the globe are facing the same social, economic, and political problems that we face here in the United States. Fate is something that we all face. We are all handed our own cards at birth. With that said, we are all living history. We are all writing and living in history, even if you don’t even know it. 

You can read a selection of Daniel’s past articles on: California in the US Civil War (here), Spanish Colonial Influence on Native Americans in Northern California (here), the collapse of the Spanish Armada in 1588 (here), early Christianity in Britain (here), the First Anglo-Dutch War (here), the 1918 Spanish Influenza outbreak (here), and an early European expedition to America (here).

Finally, Daniel Smith writes at complexamerica.org.

References

[1] Foner, Eric, and Eric Foner. A Short History of Reconstruction, 1863-1877. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2015., XXV. 

[2] "Skid Row : McSheehy, William. Internet Archive. Accessed February 19, 2022. https://archive.org/details/skidrow0000mcsh/page/n3/mode/2up. 

[3] Greenhouse, Steven. "The Rise and Rise of McDonald's." New York Times (New York, NY), June 8, 1986. 

Moral Principle and Political Reality in US History

An issue that often arises in a detailed exchange on the American experience is equality of opportunity. In many cases, it strikes a dynamic chord with many observers in our society. The essential tension that is inherent in this issue is one of moral principle v. political reality. Here, David Huff considers this in the US by looking at Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, and the present day.

Former President Lyndon B. Johnson (on the left) and then Vice President Spiro Agnew (on the right, with sunglasses) view the lift off of Apollo 11 in 1969.

Many societies throughout history have grappled with how to reconcile equality of opportunities with the harsh political of their times. On the whole, societies, particularly in their infancy, have sacrificed equality of opportunity for the sake of political expediency.

In the American experience, the Founding Fathers were more concerned about ensuring the survival of the American Republic than achieving social, political and economic equality in society. The achievement of equality of women, Native Americans and African Americans were left for future generations to undertake.

Fortunately, the United States heeded history's call to action. The patrician reforms of former President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the civil rights struggle of the 1960s and the continual call for the creation of an adequate and equitable health-care system are indicative of the potent force that equality of opportunity has played in our society.

The Role of Federal Government v. Private Enterprise

Although I concur that people should not be given a free handout, I believe in offering an individual a hand-up. Furthermore, I think that it is the government's responsibility to ensure that if social inequities get our of hand, constructive remedies should be enacted to ameliorate the situation.

Clearly, the accounting scandals in private enterprise during the past forty years underscore that government ought to play a greater role in preventing the gross pursuit of money and power which results in excessive greed and corruption.

A hallmark of a civilized society is one in which a heightened social consciousness for the welfare of others plays a role in shaping a nation's character.  A government that embraces the political mantra that no social obligation is germane will stagnate and erode, becoming frozen by its own indifference and intolerance. If enterprising and wealthy individuals have the rare privilege of escaping the bonds of everyday existence to see life from an entirely different perspective, why not share some of that resourceful knowledge with others in society?

Abraham Lincoln's Role in Shaping American Society

As a nation, we have been blessed by a number of remarkable individuals who played an influential role in shaping the American consciousness. A central figure during the nineteenth century was Abraham Lincoln, who demonstrated tremendous courage and resilience during the bloody and painful struggle of the American Civil War. Determined, shrewd, and tough, Lincoln not only managed to keep the United States together, but also abolished the long-standing institution of slavery. His accomplishments set into motion profound changes that altered the cultural fabric of the American South.

Above all, Lincoln, by the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 and his memorable Second Inaugural Address in 1865 raised the social and political consciousness of our nation. 

FDR's Impact on American Society

Another figure who played a prominent role in shaping the American consciousness was Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Elected president in 1932, Roosevelt initiated patrician reforms under his New Deal programs, which alleviated some of the human misery caused by the Great Depression. 

Although experimental in nature, his progressive reforms called for the federal government to play an active role in the social welfare of Americans.  The creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps, Works Progress Administration, which generated many job creation programs, the Soil Conservation Service, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Rural Electrification Act, and the Social Security Act, as well as the president's willingness to embrace collective bargaining power for labor, are all indicative of FDR's sweeping reforms that transformed the fabric of American society. 

The Emergence of the Kennedy Family and Lyndon B. Johnson

On January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy became the nation's 35th President of the United States. Both JFK and his wife, Jacqueline, as well as Lyndon B. Johnson played a profound impact on the transformation of American society. During his tenure, President Kennedy created the Peace Corps, introduced Civil Rights legislation and Medicare and Medicaid reform bills to Congress in order to provide greater health-care coverage and basic human rights to African Americans throughout our nation, and signed the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in 1963.

In addition, Mrs. Kennedy taught the nation about culture and distinction by combining a unique sense of fashion with a strong sense of scholarship. Furthermore, intertwined with Mrs. Kennedy's interest in fashion was her commitment to the preservation of the arts and humanities, her commitment to the restoration of the White House, her push to host a dinner of the Nobel Laureates in 1962 and her avid interest in hosting youth concerts to encourage young people to study classical music. In my opinion, all of her efforts were indicative of her genuine desire that American civilization should be committed to the idea of developing a rich and diverse cultural identify of its own.

On November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. It was a tragedy that shook the nation and the world. However, Lyndon B. Johnson, who became the 36th President of the United States, was determined to continue the progressive reform efforts that the Kennedy Administration had undertaken. Under his able leadership, President Johnson pushed through Congress an impressive legislative package, which included the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, signed the Medicare and Medicaid packages into law in 1965, and provided aid to education, urban renewal, beautification, conservation, and Head Start.

Unfortunately, Lyndon Johnson chose to enlarge significantly America's commitment to South Vietnam in July 1965. The president's determination that the United States could fight a costly war in Southeast Asia while enlarging the social welfare state at home led to the development of a choiceless society. In his mind, President Johnson thought we could adopt a two-prong strategy: conduct a war in Vietnam while enacting major social and economic reforms at home, which he called The Great Society. As a result, his willingness to engage simultaneously in the Vietnam War and The Great Society raised expectations beyond what the Federal Government could promise the American people. To that end, a powerful conservative movement began to take shape under the re-emergence of Richard M. Nixon and the 1966 election of Ronald Reagan as Governor of California. In sum, Lyndon Johnson was a tragedy in the real sense. He was the central figure in a struggle of moral importance that ended in ruin. 

Contemporary America

Now, at the dawn of 2022, that United States is in search of itself. In the wake of COVID-19, political division, economic uncertainty, social turmoil, and an inadequate healthcare system, many Americans realize that we need to revitalize our political, economic, and social institutions in order to provide greater opportunities for our fellow citizens. Only if Americans demand greater corporate accountability, insist that their elected leaders focus on strengthening America's economic infrastructure, push for the creation of a National Commission on Violence to examine the underlying problems that cause people, particularly youth, to choose self-destruction rather personal development, and demand a reduction in the national debt that is approaching 30 trillion dollars can we ever hope to restore our country to a healthy order.

In particular, in regard to the national debt, if the debt continues to climb, at some point investors will lose confidence in the government's ability to pay back borrowed funds. In essence, the higher the debt-to-Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratio, the less likely the country will pay back its debt and the higher its risk of default, which could cause a financial panic in the domestic and international markets. At this point, we will not be able to pay off the interest on the debt let alone the principal itself.

To attain positive change requires people, especially young voters, to play an active role in the political process. Perhaps the answer lies not only in parents instilling a sense of self-esteem and personal responsibility in their children, but also society encouraging youth to pursue higher education, community involvement, and state and federal campaign participation.

We must recognize that it is a matter of personal conscience, historical perspective and the inherit belief that equality of opportunity is a struggle of moral importance that as a nation we cannot afford to relinquish. After all, the future of our democracy, our way of life is contingent upon young voter's thoughtful engagement and passionate participation in the American political system. It is their future and their children's future that hang in the balance. 

Conclusion

Finally, the American people need to remember that our country's destiny is a journey, not a destination. It is a journey the American people have learned to savor, cherish and treasure. Our collective journey is filled with roadblocks and amazing achievements that provide the impetus for us to understand fully ourselves and those we love. With the passage of time. our country must learn to embrace faith that looks through adversity and enables us to flourish and thrive.

What do you think of the article? Let us know below.

Now read David’s article on Jackie Kennedy’s influence on the arts here.

How a Once Threatened Language is now the Seventh most Spoken in the World

Written by prominent columnist, Abdul Gaffar Chowdhury, the popular ‘Ekushey Song’ (Song of February 2t) was dedicated to his friends, who raised their voices against the oppression and laid down their lives to save our mother tongue – Bangla. Those who speak Bangla can never forget the day of February 21. Before making it through the International Mother Language Day, the Bengali language had to go through a bloody chapter in history, 70 years ago in 1952.

Rezaul Karim Reza explains. 

Khawaja Nazimuddin in 1948.

“My Brothers’ Blood Spattered 21st February

Can I forget the Twenty – First February?”

The Language Movement

Just after the fall of the British Empire in the Indian Subcontinent, two new countries emerged on the world map: India and Pakistan. Pakistan had two wings – West Pakistan and East Pakistan (Bangladesh today). There were no land borders between the two wings of Pakistan, and there were huge linguistic and cultural differences among the people of the United Pakistan.  

To eliminate the differences, especially the language, on March 21, 1948 in Dhaka, the founding father and then the Governor General of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah declared “Urdu and only Urdu” will be the state language of Pakistan. The declaration sparked protest among the predominantly Bengali speaking people, especially in East Pakistan where more than 90% of people used Bangla as their first language; whereas only 7% used Urdu as the first language.   

But the Pakistani government did not move an inch from their decision on making Urdu the state language. On January 27, 1952 in Dhaka, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Khawaja Nazimuddin, repeated Ali’s Urdu only policy and warned that there will be no compromise with it.

This time, people from all walks of life burst into anger. They demanded Bangla as the state language of East Pakistan. The angry protestors chanted ‘We Want Mother Tongue Bangla,’ bringing festoons and placards and marching through the roads. The students of Dhaka University called a General Strike on February 21, 1952.

When they brought out the procession on that day as planned, police reacted with massive crackdowns, including mass arrests and firing. Police killed several protestors and arrested many of their leaders.

As the news of the police brutality spread across the country, many more people gathered in the city of Dhaka and staged another protest rally. Again, police fired on and killed the protestors. Among the killings, Salam, Barkat, Rafique, Jabber, and Shafiur had been identified as the young students.

The Achievement

The significance of ‘Vasha Andolon’ or the language movement in 1952 left many a lasting legacy. In fact, the spirit of the movement embedded Bangladesh’s independence in 1971.

Today, the five students killed on that fateful day are recognized as ‘Language Martyr.’ In recognition of the sacrifice of the protestors for the language, a Martyr Monument has been erected on the spot of Dhaka University where they were shot dead. In addition, one of Asia’s largest book fairs known as ‘Ekushey Boy Mela’ or 21st February Book Fair is observed to commemorate the sacrifice of the protestors every year on February 21st in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

To remember the day, the most prestigious Bengali award, Ekusey Padak or 21st February Prize is given to many distinguished candidates for their contribution to certain fields, especially in linguistic and cultural diversity in the country every year.

Once a dying language, Bangla is now the world’s 7th most spoken language. The language movement motivated the people of East Pakistan to fight for their identity and a country of their own – Bangladesh. And it happened in 1971 – Bangladesh was born after a nine month bloody struggle. 

The legacy of the language movement did not always stay within the country; after the independence of Bangladesh, the recognition of the language movement went beyond the border. 

In 1999, the UNESCO announced that there should be an International Mother Language Day in reconnection of the struggle of the Bengali speaking people and their language – Bangla. The day has been observed to promote awareness of cultural and linguistic diversity around the world since its first observance in 2000.

As I read somewhere, learning a language is like discovering a new country, killing it could be losing a culture, a tradition, an identity, and a whole nation. But, Bangladesh survived both. Today, I take great pride in speaking Bangla as my mother tongue and living in an independent country – Bangladesh.

What do you think of the article? Let us know below.

US Cold War Propaganda: The Failures of the CIA in its Radio Broadcasts to Albania in the Early Cold War – Part 2

The US had a variety of ways to influence citizens behind the ‘iron curtain’ during the Cold War. One of those was radio broadcasts. Here, Richard Cummings, author of a recent book Cold War Frequencies (Amazon US | Amazon UK), continues the catastrophic story of how the CIA got a vessel ready to broadcast in Albania in the early 1950s. Here, Richard looks at what happened when the ship was close to Albania.

Read part 1 on how the U.S. prepared for the mission here.

Enver Hoxha, First Secretary of Albania from 1946 to 1985. Shown here in1944.

The JUANITA arrived in Greece on March 25, 1951, to perform the following mission under Project BGSPEED:

The JUANITA was equipped to broadcast on the medium wave band into Albania, utilizing the skip wave technique. When the JUANITA was purchased, there was no certainty that any country would grant permission for her to operate within that country's coastal waters. Therefore, it was understood that the broadcasts might have to be conducted from the open sea, that the vessel obtained for this role would have to be sufficiently seaworthy for open sea operations, and the equipment capable of broadcasting from a considerable distance at sea. 

This skip wave, which exists both day and night, becomes effective as darkness falls and the ionosphere descends and becomes ineffective as the sun rises and the ionosphere ascends.) During the night hours, the beam from the antenna strikes the ionosphere. It bounces back to earth, permitting reception much farther from the transmitter than is normally possible by ground wave--which follows the ground sixty or seventy miles or so, depending on terrain, and grounds out.) 

Problems

After the JUANITA arrived in Greece, serious problems began; below is a summary of these problems, extracted from declassified OPC and CIA reports -- in no particular order of importance.

·       A contract engineer was sent to Greece to review the JUANITA operation. He wrote: “The JUANITA was intended to broadcast medium wave--skip wave into its target from 175-300 miles, came to light during a meeting with Washington communications men two days before my departure to Athens. On arrival in Athens, I found that the men (operations and communications) had been unacquainted with this intention. They expressed surprise that Washington intended to depend on skip wave, for they believed skip wave had never been depended on before for medium wave broadcast.”

·       The Albanian area is greater than the noise level off the U.S. east coast. Radio stations in the Balkans make a Babel of voices, move up
 and down the dial, and operate
with many times the power the JUANITA was given

·       A chance, ever-present in open sea operation, of a wave through the wheelhouse door or the hatch over the transmitting room threatened to fry the communications men at their posts and disable the equipment permanently

·       There is no ventilation in the transmitting room. The heat and smell when the equipment in operation is intense enough to cause sickness, a condition aggravated by semi-tropical weather and the violent movement of the ship

·       The vessel was delivered in the U.S. with its original wiring, which is of the house type and unsuitable for marine use. The vessel's house-type wiring causes repeated fires. This is evidenced by numerous minor fires which have occurred onboard and the extreme difficulty that the engineer has had in maintaining electric current throughout the vessel

·       At anchor in a sheltered island cove, one finds oneself a few hundred yards from village dwellings. After the fall of darkness, the large white yacht, whose presence has brought excitement to the otherwise dreary existence of the islanders, lights up (when transmitting) like a Christmas tree. Spreader and running lights glow, and brilliant flashes play about the rigging.

Conclusions

One conclusion of the JUANITA'S history was: "It was not necessary to buy a yacht, equip her, operate her, sail her across the Atlantic, and maintain her in Greece for half a year to demonstrate that her transmitting equipment would not work."

In one OPC report, there was this commentary:

I wish to reiterate my belief that there need be
no apologies by anyone for a decision now to liquidate this particular experiment. It has provided some people
with valuable experiences and has taught several lessons that could not have been learned without the basic proposition being tried out in actual practice. It has, however, taken up a great deal of time that might better now be directed to more pressing and fruitful activities. 

In March 1952, Acting Assistant Director for Policy Coordination wrote a memorandum to the Assistant Director, Office of Communications, in which he summarized the principal failures of Project BGSPEED, part of which read:

Many things have gone wrong in the implementation of this project, and it was terminated in October 1951. No actual broadcasting ever took place. Much of the onus for the failure can be attributed to shortcomings within OPC. These include lack of seasoned judgment from various OPC officers concerned with the project, lack
of continuous, adequate supervision, unfortunate selection of a vessel: etc. On the other head, the communications equipment provided proved inadequate for the contemplated operation. This constitutes an expensive lesson for OPC. 

The JUANITA, purchased for $80,000 in 1951, was sold in May 1953 for $10,000. 

Although Project BGSPEED was considered a failure, that did not stop OPC from beginning clandestine psychological warfare broadcasts into Albania as the Voice of Free Albania (often interchanged with Radio Free Albania) from the CIA radio transmitting site near Athens, Greece at 10 p.m. local time on September 18, 1951.

This article is based on Chapter 5 of Richard’s book: Cold War Frequencies: CIA Clandestine Radio Broadcasting to the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, published in 2021 by McFarland & Co. Available here: Amazon US | Amazon UK

The US Response to Aggression Against China in the 1930s: The Stimson Doctrine

If a stronger country invades and conquers part or all of a weaker one in an act of aggression, the United States usually does not accept or recognize this act as lawful. This is known as the Stimson Doctrine. Think of the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, or Russia’s 2014 invasion of the Crimea. Such was not always how the U.S has approached such situations before the twentieth century. The U.S. would recognize acts of power as facts of life. Peter Deane explains.

Henry Stimson. Source: Harris & Ewing, available here.

U.S. Secretary of State John M. Hay’s Open Door Policy set the background in 1899. The U.S. intended to preserve the territorial integrity of China. At the time, other powers seemed to respect it; however this changed over time.

1915

Japan issued the Twenty-One Demands to China with the goal to obtain control of large portions of China’s infrastructure. With the European powers occupied with World War One, and the Japanese Empire an allied nation, they made no effort to oppose it. China had no choice other than war to the acceptance of the demands.

Secretary of State William J. Bryan was strongly opposed to them as a contravention of the Open Door Policy. Rebuffed by the European powers, he wished then to act unilaterally. He was also a sincere pacifist and wished to do nothing hostile. The State Department issued a note: the U.S. would not recognize the legality of any of the demands, or officially accept them as true. In other words, nonrecognition of any Japanese treaty that infringed on China’s sovereignty. At the time the State Department saw it as a weak expedient—no threat of force or sanction lay behind it—but the best one available. This attack on Japan’s authority did nothing to impair the empire’s power. Japan disregarded the note. 

1931

On September 18, the “Mukden Incident” occurred. Mukden was a railway station in Manchuria, a north Chinese province. The Japanese army alleged that Chinese soldiers used explosives to damage one section of track of a Japanese owned railroad. A later League of Nations investigation found the “Incident” to be a Japanese Army fabrication. 

However the Mukden Incident provoked public outcry among the Japanese and provided the pretext for the Japanese army to advance against nearby Chinese army forces, which were disorganized and easily defeated. They successfully expanded their attack across all Manchuria in the following weeks. 

Manchuria was a resource-rich province adjacent to Japanese-controlled Korea. Many of the Twenty-One Demands had pertained to Manchuria, such as railroad control. The Japanese Empire benefited greatly from influence over Manchuria, and stood to gain still more with absolute control. Japanese occupation of an entire Chinese province was thinly veiled with the formation of a new nation called Manchukuo.

In this way, from the standpoint of international law, stood the Nine-Power Treaty of 1922, which guaranteed China’s territorial integrity, the Kellogg-Briand Treaty (Pact of Paris) and the League of Nations. Both China and Japan were signatories and members, respectively. The U.S. was a signatory of both treaties but not a League member. 

The Kellogg-Briand Pact was a 1928 treaty with over fifty signatories. Each agreed to renounce war and military aggression as national policy. Such a lovely idea. But sad to say, the Treaty had no teeth. Violation carried no penalty. Other signatories could respond ad lib. 

Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson raised the issue of response in Cabinet meetings. President Herbert C. Hoover, although he had much foreign policy experience, was otherwise occupied. By this time the Depression was worsening steadily, beyond prior ones, with no end in sight. 

Hoover was a man of Quaker roots and, while not a pacifist, he shrank from the idea of the use of military force. He saw the U.S. armed forces as a purely defensive tool. In a Cabinet meeting on October 9, Stimson learned that Hoover’s main concern about the crisis was to avoid conflict and not allow “under any circumstances anybody to deposit that baby in our lap.” Perhaps the League of Nations would act somehow.

The European powers faced declining economies too and were in no hurry to act. The League opted to appoint a commission (the Lytton Commission) to investigate the Mukden Incident, over Japanese protest. That decision effectively stalled any League response for months. 

Stimson felt the need to do something. Repeatedly he raised the issue of the “weapon” of economic sanctions against Japan. But Hoover had very strong opinions against the use of sanctions because of the civilian suffering they could cause. Also, the U.S. could ill afford to close a foreign market for its goods. Sanctions were warfare conducted by other means and could lead to military conflict (as they did ten years later). He had famously worked to relieve hunger in Europe due to WWI and wished to inflict privation on no one. Hoover grew testy over the issue. 

Hoover suggested instead, in the November 9 Cabinet meeting, that Bryan’s strategy of nonrecognition be used. Stimson adopted this idea and worked out a formulation with State Department staff. This he brought back to the Cabinet to some opposition. Both the Secretaries of War and the Navy opposed it as risky; the Administration was not prepared to put force behind any move that might antagonize Japan. But Stimson and Hoover agreed. It committed the U.S. to nothing. Others could join in if they wished.

1932

Stimson’s staff finished the final draft. “The American Government … does not intend to recognize any situation, treaty or agreement which may be brought about by means contrary to the covenants and obligations of…” standing agreements. 

This was delivered first to the embassies of China and Japan on January 7, and then copies sent to the other Nine Power Treaty signatories. The Chinese and Japanese ambassadors were first informed of its content in person.  Neither reacted strongly. 

In February, Stimson made the policy public by writing an open letter to the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It said in part:

“One cannot discuss the possibility of modifying or abrogating … provisions of the Nine Power Treaty without considering at the same time the other promises upon which they were really dependent.” 

The United States could cease compliance with treaties too. But everyone knew that such was an empty threat at a time when the U.S. was attempting to shrink its own navy to save money. Given this reality, the Cabinet officers opposed felt it worse than useless to make an empty threat. 

Stimson was stunned when the British government reacted coolly to the note, rather than support and echo its message. Ultimately the British did support it, publicly at the League of Nations. This coincided with the Lytton Commission’s report that the Mukden incident was a fabrication. This led to the prompt departure of the Japanese from the League of Nations. 

“Manchukuo” gained little in the way of diplomatic recognition in the following years, but Japanese aggression was not swayed by world opinion.

President Hoover faced re-election and was not fond of the term “Stimson Doctrine”. It had been his suggestion originally. But the term stuck, to the Secretary’s quiet satisfaction. The Doctrine has remained a basic principle of American foreign policy since then. 

What do you think of the Stimson Doctrine and China? Let us know below.

Bibliography

Fausold, M. L. The Presidency of Herbert C. Hoover. Lawrence, KA; University of Kansas Press, 1985

Ferrell, R. H. American Diplomacy in the Great Depression: Hoover-Stimson Foreign Policy, 1929-1933. New Haven, CT; Yale University Press, 1957

Hoover, H. The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover: The Cabinet and the Presidency, 1920-1933. New York, NY; The Macmillan Co., 1952

Jeansonne, G. The Life of Herbert Hoover: Fighting Quaker, 1928-1933. New York, NY; Palgrave Macmillan, 2012

Stimson, H. L. and Bundy, McG. On Active Service in Peace and War. New York, NY; Harper Bros., 1947

Wheeler, G. E. Admiral William Veazie Pratt, U.S. Navy: A Sailor’s Life. Washington, DC; Naval History Division, Department of the Navy, 1974

Nazi Germany’s Helicopters in World War 2

It is little known that Germany produced helicopters in World War II. Here, Daniel Boustead discussed the successes and failures of the helicopters that Nazi Germany produced – as well as how the Nazis ultimately saw little benefit from them.

The Flettner Fl 282 helicopter at trials after World War II. It has the US military star marking.

The German helicopters of World War II are one of the little-known weapons of the Nazi German arsenal. These aircrafts were created to serve a specific military purpose and they did have some success in the role they were assigned. However, these roles were largely irrelevant because it bled the Third Reich dry of its resources and diverted time away from much needed weapons projects. Furthermore, these helicopters had some flaws which destroyed their effectiveness as weapons and as pieces of equipment for military use. The German helicopters were just another example of the Nazi wasteful squandering of precious time and resources that would ultimately yield no results or change the outcome of the war.

Helicopters in the war

The Third’s Reich’s helicopters that served in combat did have some successes.  The FA-330 “Bachstelze” was a small gyroplane helicopter which was designed for the use as a submarine-based reconnaissance aircraft ([1]). The FA-330 Bachstelze (Wagtail) accomplished its job of reconnaissance by being towed behind a surfaced submarine or U-Boat ([2]). The FA-330 was attached to the submarine by a steel cable working from a winch on the deck (2). The airstream of the ship or submarine supposed to suffice to allow the FA 330 to lift up (3). The FA-330 would hold an altitude of 440 feet and could see about 25 miles with the assistance powerful binoculars and report back to the U-Boat by telephone (2).  A total of some 200 FA-330s were built (3). As early as February 1943, the FA-330s were used successfully with the Type IX D2 U-Boat’s which were operating in the Far East (1). The FA-330s were also used in the Southern Atlantic and Indian Oceans where aircraft patrols were not common at the time (2). The FA 330 was also used by U-Boats in the Gulf of Aden (4). The U-Boat U-861 used the FA-330 gyro kite to patrol in the Indian Ocean off Madagascar. In the aftermath of the Japanese permitting the establishment of a German U-Boat base at Penang Malaya (in the summer of 1943), the Germans exchanged the FA-330 for a small Japanese float plane. On another occasion at the U-Boat base at Surabaya (Java) an FA-330 gyro kite was exchanged for a Japanese floatplane to supplement the two Arado reconnaissance aircraft which kept watch over the harbor.

Another German helicopter which made its impact during World War II was the Flettner FL 282. From November 1942 until the end of January 1943, the FL 282 conducted service trials mining operations on the German minelayer Drache alongside the ship Bulgaria in the central Aegean Sea (5). The service trials tests were successful as noted by the Naval Inspectorate report from February 10, 1943, which stated “The Fl 282 can now be operated successfully as a shipboard aircraft for patrol and anti-submarine tasks, even from small ships”. By 1943 the FL 282s were routinely being used by the Kriegsmarine for convoy protection and reconnaissance (6). The FL 282 would fly from platforms above gun turrets of convoy escort vessels in the Aegean, Baltic, and Mediterranean Seas. The Fl 282 was successful in searching Allied submarines and summoning other Luftwaffe aircraft to attack the U-Boats (7). In this case Fl-282s encountered and spotted U-Boats and other Luftwaffe aircraft during the fleet exercises which were done in conjunction with the 21st U-Boat Flotilla in Danzig Bay and north of Gotland Island from April 24, 1943, to May 15, 1943 (8). At the end of February 1945 FL 282s spotted the attack of the Red Army’s 1stand 2nd White Russian Front in Far Pomerania at the right time (7). However, because of the weakness of the German army units, their report could not stop the further Soviet advance. In 1945 surviving Fl 282s were stationed with the Luftwaffe’s only operational helicopter squadron the Transportstaffel (transport squadron) 40 at Rangsdorf and Ainring at Mulhdorf, Bavaria in their role as artillery spotters (8). The FL-282s of the Transportstaffel 40 made many flights during this time into and out of besieged and encircled towns transporting dispatches, mail and key personnel (9).

Diverting resources

In spite of the success of the German Helicopters, their deployment and development diverted precious resources away from more essential and important weapons programs. The most important weapon that the German Luftwaffe needed from 1942 to 1945 was something that would destroy the Anglo-American bombing raids over Germany and Austria. This was destroying German war production and the many of the Third Reich’s cities. The factories in Munich and Eisenach, that produced the Fl 282, were destroyed by Allied bombing (8). The Anglo-Americans also bombed the Flettner Johannisthal factory that produced the Fl-282 Helicopter. The fact that these factories existed for production of the Fl-282 showcase that these factories were diverting away precious people and materiel away from more important weapons projects.

The aircraft that was the perfect choice to destroy Allied Bombers and their Fighter escorts was the German ME 262 Jet. The ME 262 Jet Fighter had a maximum speed of 540 miles per hour at 19,685 feet (10). The ME 262 Jet Fighter was equipped with four 30 millimeter MK 108 cannons (11). On May 22, 1943, German Fighter Ace Adolf Galland tested the ME 262 Jet and felt it could allow the Luftwaffe a qualitative superiority over the Allied quantitative superiority (12).  According to a detailed analysis of the records of combat from August 1944 to May 1945, ME-262 Jets contributed to the losses of 52 bombers and 10 fighters that belonged to the Eighth Army Air Force (13). This means that a total of 62 aircraft from the Eighth Army Air Force were lost by the ME 262 Jets from August 1944 to May 1945, while 200 ME 262 Jet Fighters were destroyed during this period of time (13). Even though these figures may be exaggerated, they at least set the terms upon which the ME 262s combat performance has to be evaluated (13).

Options

In contrast the German helicopters of that period were not shooting down any enemy aircraft, making the need for their existence less necessary. However Nazi Germany’s leader Adolf Hitler destroyed the ME 262 Jet Fighter’s chances of success by his Fuhrerbefehl or Leader Order of June 8, 1944, which limited the ME 262’s role to a bomber, a role it wasn’t suited for (14). Hitler’s fateful order hastened the demise of the Third Reich because it delayed the ME 262s production and introduction to combat.

Another aeronautical weapon that could have halted the Allied air supremacy over the Third Reich was the X-4 air-to-air missile. By 1943 it was becoming apparent that existing aircraft machine guns and cannons were insufficiently lethal against Allied Heavy Bombers (15). The X-4 missile was developed and it was a wire-guided system (16). The guidance system used a pair of trailing wires derived from the Dortmund/Duisberg system developed earlier for anti-ship missiles. After the launch, the pilot tracked the missile by following its tracer flare and steered the missile using a Knirps joystick control. The warhead was triggered either by a Rheinmetall-Borsig Kranich acoustic proximity fuse or an impact fuse. The ME 262 Jet was supposed to have four X-4 Missiles per plane. The X-4 program was cancelled on February 6, 1945, by Kammler’s edict which shut down many of the German missile programs. The Nazi Luftwaffe’s entire production should have focused on producing only the ME-262 Jet and the X-4 air-to-air missile.

Faults with the helicopters

The major German helicopters also had some faults which reduced their effectiveness as weapons. In May, 1943 U-Boat losses reached 41 U-Boats that were lost at sea and the losses continued to get worse after that point (17). The reason for these losses were improved Allied radar technology, long-range airplanes, breaking the German Enigma Code, better anti-submarine weapons, and better anti-submarine warfare tactics. These losses were to become apparent in the Indian Ocean and Southern Atlantic, when Allied long range aircraft appeared in these areas (2). This forced the U-Boats to crash dive quickly in these areas which resulted in them not be able to recover the FA-330 autogyro pilot from the ocean (2). The fact that the U-Boat war was effectively lost after “Black May” 1943 eliminated the need for the FA-330 Autogyro. On January 3, 1943, while the Fl-282s were undergoing test trials, they were attacked by Allied Bombers and Torpedo planes (5). Though no damage or casualties were sustained, a statement was issued in the aftermath of this incident. The ship that received the statement was the “Aegean”, which requested, “to permit the operation of the two valuable FL 282s only when there is no prospect of enemy countermeasures”. The means it could be destroyed while on a ship.  In 1945 when the Fl-282’s were operating at the Berlin-Rangsdorf they fell victim to Soviet fighters and Soviet flak (7). The fact that the FL-282 could be shot down by anti-aircraft guns or fighter planes further reduced its effectiveness as a weapon (7). 

The Nazi helicopters received very little attention in the period of World War II and thereafter. The aircrafts were designed for a specific role. However, these roles became irrelevant because the Third Reich was being bombed into submission. The aircraft that was most needed to stem the tide for the Luftwaffe was the ME-262 Jet Fighter to destroy the Allied Air onslaught and not a helicopter. The Nazi helicopter projects were mainly ineffective, and it wasted the Nazis resources which could have been used for more ME 262-Jets and X-4 air-to-air missiles. 

What do you think of German helicopters in World War II? Let us know below.

Now, you can read World War II history from Daniel: “Did World War Two Japanese Kamikaze Attacks have more Impact than Nazi V-2 Rockets?” here, “Japanese attacks on the USA in World War II” here, and “Was the Italian Military in World War 2 Really that Bad?” here.

[1] Nowarra , Heinz J. German Helicopters 1928-1945. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History Publishing. 1990. 37. 

[2] “The Focke Achgelis FA 330 Bachstelze(Wagtail)”. Uboat.net. Accessed on November 29th, 2021. https://uboat.net/technical/bachstelze.htm

3 Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters WW2. Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon. Com. November  29th, 2021. 24. 

4 Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters of World War 2.  Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon.com.  November 29th, 2021. 30. 

5 Johnston, David. Translator. The Luftwaffe Profile Series No. 6: Flettner FL 282. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Publishing Ltd. 1996. 27. 

6 Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters of World War 2. Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon.com. November 29th, 2021. 65. 

7 Nowarra, Heniz J. German Helicopters 1928-1945. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History  Publishing. 1990. 28. 

8 Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters of World War 2. Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon.com. November 29th, 2021. 72. 

9 Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters of World War 2. Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon.com. November 29th, 2021. 72 to 73. 

10 Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 118. 

11 Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 130. 

12 Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 32 to 33.  

13 Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 55. 

14 Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 36. 

15 Zaloga, Steven J. German Guided Missiles of World War II: Fritz-X to Wasserfall and X-4. New York: New York. Osprey Publishing Ltd. 2019. 40. 

16 Zaloga, Steven J. German Guided Missiles of World War II: Fritz-X to Wasserfall and X-4. New York: New York. Osprey Publishing Ltd. 2019. 40 to 41. 

17 Miller, David. U-Boats: The Illustrated History of Raiders of the Deep. Washington;  District of Columbia. Brassey’s. 2000. 129. 

Works Cited Page

Boyne, Walter J. Messerschmitt ME 262: Arrow to the Future. Atlgen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History/Aviation History Publishing Ltd. 1994. 

Johnston, David. Translator. The Luftwaffe Profiles Series No.6: Flettner FL 282. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Publishing Ltd. 1996.

Lindberg, Leo. German Helicopters of World War 2. Middletown: Delaware. “Self-Published” and available on Amazon.com. November 29th, 2021.

Miller, David. U-Boats: The Illustrated History of the Raiders of the Deep. Washington: District of Columbia. Brassey’s. 2000.

Nowarra, Heinz J. German Helicopters 1928-1945. Atglen: Pennsylvania. Schiffer Military History Publishing. 1990.

“The Focke Achgelis FA 330 Bachstelze (Wagtail)”. Uboat.net. Accessed on November 29th, 2021. https://uboat.net/technical/bachstelze.htm

Zaloga, Steven J. German Guided Missiles of World War II: Fritz X to Wasserfall and X-4. New York: New York. Osprey Publishing Ltd. 2019. 

The Modern Military History of India: Part 2 - The 1961 Battle of Mormugao Harbour

India’s military history is rich, long and storied yet there is criminally little written about it and it is hideously ignored in many debates on military history of the 19th century. This perhaps is because Indians themselves know very little about what the Indian Army did in the years between 1858 and 1910. In these few decades, the Indian Army became one of the most combat experienced forces in the world as it fought alongside the British Army from Egypt to Afghanistan. The Indian Army (though officially known as the British Indian Army, it was always referred to as the Indian Army), which was already one of the most professional and most well-equipped forces in the world, by the time the Great War rolled around, had become arguably the single most experienced armed force in the world alongside the British Army.

Siddhant A. Joshi continues his series of the modern military history of India by looking at The Battle of Mormugao Harbour in 1961, which was a battle between the Indian Army and Portugal. At the time, Portugal still held Goa, India as a colony.

You can read part 1 on the Indian Campaigns of 1897 and the Bravery of the Sikh Infantry here.

The NRP Afonso de Albuquerque. Source: Chanthujohnson, available here.

The names INS Betwa and NRP Afonso de Albuquerque mean nothing to most people and yet these two ships, pawns on the chessboard of a small and historically insignificant war1, became the forgotten sentries of a now dead era. On the 18thof December 1961 – one day into the Indian attack on the Portuguese colony of Goa – the NRP Afonoso de Albuquerque would spot the vanguard of the Indian Navy’s carrier force, led by the frigate INS Betwa, and – unbeknownst to the crew of either vessel – they would both make history.

1961, in many ways, saw the completion of India. It would mark the culmination of India’s effort to rid itself of the past and begin anew. In the years previous and immediately following independence in 1947, India set about trying to carve its own, fresh identity. This meant complete unification of the new nation. In 1947 it invaded and annexed the small kingdom of Junagadh in modern day Gujarat, in 1948 it annexed the Kingdom of Hyderabad in modern day Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra. In 1954 it took the small Portuguese colony of Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

A nation

By the end of the 1950s, the newborn Republic of India had – for the most part – united itself into one cohesive nation. The Portuguese colony of Goa, the now famous holiday destination on India’s western coast, stuck out like a sore thumb.

Initially, India wanted to avoid invasion and confrontation at all cost since it wanted to keep international favor for which it could not be seen as an aggressor and because, it must be mentioned, Portugal was very much a part of NATO. The effort to annex Goa had been for a decade (1950-1960) entirely diplomatic with moves such as the introduction of visa restrictions which made it almost impossible for Portuguese Goans to enter India and ending consular services in the colony. By 1961, however, it had become evident that Portugal was not going to let Goa go without a fight. The Portuguese army mistakenly shelled an Indian ferry vessel believing it to be a landing craft in November of that year. That, many people believe, was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

In December, India invaded and within 3 days the Portuguese would surrender. There would be no NATO outcry, no shouting at the UN, no international condemnation. The 3-day war would become part of the footnotes of history. And yet, NRP Afonso de Albuquerque and the squadron led by INS Betwa would fight the last of a dead form of battle – the last ship-to-ship exchange of cannon fire.

 

The 2 Forces in Comparison – 1961

There was, from the offset and in every field, a massive disparity between the Portuguese and the Indians. The Portuguese had a total of 5,000 military and police personnel – barely the size of an Indian infantry brigade. While their native infantry, native marines and Portuguese infantry were well trained and well equipped, their police personnel were simply not up to the task. They also had no combat experience and for many this would be their first fight.

The Indians on the other hand showed up with the 17th Infantry Division and the 50th Parachute Brigade – some 45,000 in all. The Indian Air Force had attached to these, 20 English Electric Canberra B(I) heavy bombers and over 20 different state-of-the-art fighter and attack aircraft. Crucially, the Indian troops were extremely well trained, extremely well equipped and – most importantly – highly experienced with every single high-ranking officer having fought in World War 2 and the first Indo-Pakistan War.

This disparity, which lent itself to the obvious result, extended very heavily to naval forces as well. The Portuguese had 3 light patrol boats reinforced by the light frigate NRP Afonso de Albuquerque. The Indian Navy, on the other hand, had mobilized the aircraft carrier INS Vikrant and her escort force which consisted of 2 cruisers, 1 destroyer, 8 frigates and 4 minesweepers.

While the aircraft carrier saw almost no action, its forward screening vessels did. INS Delhi, one of the cruisers, shelled Diu Fortress in the opening hours of the invasion. INS Mysore, the second cruiser, and INS Trishul, one of the frigates, launched an amphibious assault on Anjidiv Fort and supported the Indian marines with sustained firing on the island-fort. But, apart from INS Delhi opening fire with her machine guns on a Portuguese patrol boat, none of the Indian vessels encountered any naval resistance – except when INS Betwa and INS Beas, both of which were Leopard Class frigates, sailed into the entrance of Mormugao Harbour where they would find the PNR Afonso de Albuquerque.

The Leopard Class vs the Afonso de Albuqeurque – Technical Comparison

The two vessels were horribly mismatched. The Leopard Class frigates were modern, radar armed and extremely reliable vessels. The Afonso de Albuquerque was, by 1961, almost 30 years old – having been commissioned into service in 1934. In comparison, the Betwa and Beas were just a year old, having been ordered in 1954 and commissioned in 1960. Afonso had no radar and her 120mm guns, although she had 4 of them, were old and clunky.

In comparison, the Indian vessels were armed with modern NATO standard radar systems, the brand spanking new QF 4.5-inch Mk.6 naval guns and, significantly, an experienced and well-trained crew.

The 4 120mm cannons of the Portuguese vessel, though of a larger caliber than the Indian (120 as opposed to 113), fired only 2 rounds per minute (some sources say 5). The QF 4.5- inch Mk.6 fired 16-24 per minute (depending on if they were hand loaded or power loaded). The shells the Portuguese fired were of World War 1 vintage and their fuses were unreliable. The Indian shells were far superior with excellent fuses.

The nearly 50-year-old Portuguese cannons were also horribly inaccurate. The QF 4.5-inch Mk.6 was lethally accurate.

By the time the Indian vessels were spotted by the Afonso, she had been given orders to act as a radio station, relaying messages back and forth, and nothing more. She had not spotted the Indian squadron approaching and when she did see the Indian vessels, they had already positioned themselves on either side of her and were waiting for orders to open fire.

But, NRP Afonso de Albuquerque, with everything against her, chose not to go quietly into the night. When she was asked to surrender by INS Beas, she quietly weighed anchor, slipped her moorings and headed out to fight.

The Battle of Mormugao Harbour – 70 Minutes of Glory

By 1100hrs on the 18th of December, the Indian frigates had entered the harbor and had blocked the only way in and out. NRP Afonso de Albuquerque had very little room left in which to maneuver. At 1200hrs, INS Beas fired warning shots across the bow of the NRP Afonso de Albuquerque and transmitted requests for surrender.

It must also be mentioned that just a few minutes before the request for surrender, IAF aircraft had bombed port facilities at Mormugao Harbour and the psychological effects of air strikes against which the Portuguese could do nothing must not be ignored. Everybody onboard knew this was an unwinnable fight. That the enemy could hit them from the air. That they were outnumbered, outclassed and outgunned. That they had no room left, no way to escape, nowhere to run. They knew that, should they surrender, no one would blame them.

Yet, at about 1202hrs, NRP Afonso de Albuquerque fired back and thus begun the Battle of Mormugao Harbour – the final vestige of a bygone era. Within the first minute, the crippling fire superiority of the Indian vessels became obvious as Afonso struggled to keep up with their rate of fire. Her old guns also failed her in the relatively long ranges of combat (7,500yd or almost 7km/4miles) where they struggled to hit the Indian vessels while the accurate Indian guns did not struggle whatsoever and scored hit after hit.2

In fact, the damage done to the superstructure of Afonso is plainly visible at https://laststandonzombieisland.com/tag/afonso-de-albuquerque/ where they have some excellent photographs of the battle (which, unfortunately, I cannot use here due to copyright reasons).

The first casualties came at 1215hrs when Afonso took a direct hit to the bridge, injuring the weapons officer. All the while, Afonso attempted to close the range and return fire. It is unclear how close she was to her opponents when she took her first KIA when, at 1225hrs, another direct hit killed the radio officer and severely wounded her commander, Captain António da Cunha Aragão. In the same salvo, her propulsion and steering system was heavily damaged and it was becoming increasingly clear to the crew of the ship that they would not be able to close the distance to the Indian vessels.

Within 10 minutes of this salvo, at 1235hrs, Afonso swung 180 degrees (it is not known whether to port or starboard) and ran herself aground at Bambolim Beach. From here, she would continue to fire on the Indian frigates. At some point now, the Sergeant-in-Charge of Signals disobeyed a direct order from Captain Aragão and ordered the white flag to be raised.

However, as per the official Portuguese records, ‘But as no one had actually given the order to surrender, the flag was lowered again. The flag was not seen by any means by the Indians because of the windy and smoky conditions.’3

By 1250hrs, the fate of the ship had been sealed. She had lost 5 of her crew and 13 injured. She had fired between 350 and 400 shells and any damage on the Indian vessels had been negligible at best. The order was given to abandon ship. Once again, per official Portuguese records ‘Most of the personnel complied with the order to abandon ship, while the fire from the Indian ships continued, reaching the ship and the surrounding area, with the clear intention of hitting the men who were already on the bank.’4

By 1310hrs, the ship had been abandoned. The Battle of Mormugao Harbour was officially over and with it, the book finally closed on the story of naval shot and shell.

In Conclusion

The small 3-day-long Indian campaign in Goa saw a lot of firsts for South Asia. It marked the first time a South Asian navy used an aircraft carrier, the famous INS Vikrant, in combat operations – regardless of the fact that the carrier and her air wing did not actually see combat. It marked the first use of a jet bomber by a South Asian nation in combat when IAF Canberra bombers struck the airport at Panjim. It marked India’s first amphibious operation – the storming of Anjidiv Fort.

It is fitting then that it should also see the last battle of a bygone era. Perhaps it is poetic as well. You see, NRP Afonso de Albuquerque was named after Afonso de Albuquerque who was a Portuguese general that, in 1510, conquered Goa for the Portuguese crown. The vessel named after the man who conquered Goa struck down on the day that Goa is made free. The world has a funny way of righting itself.

What do you think of the Battle of Mormugao Harbour? Let us know below.

1 I must here mention, coming from a military family, that no war is insignificant no matter how small it is. It has a profound and very long-lasting effect on the people that fight it and the people that are directly affected by it. That being said, the 1961 Indian Annexation/Invasion of Goa was a war that was historically insignificant

– i.e it achieved nothing of historical importance, did not swing the fate of countries or continents, but merely liberated a small Portuguese Colonial enclave.

2 https://laststandonzombieisland.com/tag/afonso-de-albuquerque/

3 https://web.archive.org/web/20150317124204/http://www.areamilitar.net/DIRECTORIO/NAV.aspx?nn=128 ‘Entretanto o Sargento de sinais terá dado ordem para que fosse içada uma bandeira branca, o que foi feito. Mas como na realidade ninguém tinha dado ordem de rendição, a bandeira voltou a ser arriada. A bandeira não foi de qualquer das formas avistada pelos indianos por causa das condições de vento e fumo.’, translated by Google Translate

4 https://web.archive.org/web/20150317124204/http://www.areamilitar.net/DIRECTORIO/NAV.aspx?nn=128 ‘A maioria do pessoal cumpre a ordem de abandonar o navio, enquanto o fogo dos navios indianos continua, a atingir o navio e a área circundante, no claro propósito de atingir os homens que já se encontravam na margem.’, translated by Google Translate

The Battle of Blair Mountain: America’s Largest Worker Uprising

The Battle of Blair Mountain took place in 1921 in Logan County, West Virginia. It is the largest labor uprising in United States history and the largest armed uprising since the US Civil War. Roy Williams explains.

Miners surrendering to federal soldiers.

Introduction

The history of labor in America is a complex matter in attempting to understand the nature of economics, worker rights, and the conflicting political apparatuses. While the traditional narrative of American labor history relies heavily on an approach that magnifies the importance of urban centers and familiar elements of the industrial revolution, and economic expansion, there are significant aspects of labor history that occurred in rural areas. One such event stands as extremely consequential but largely glossed over by the generalist historical narrative. The Battle of Blair Mountain in Logan County West Virginia stands as the largest labor uprising in United States history as well as the largest armed uprising since the Civil War. From August 25th to September 2nd, 1921, 10,000 coal miners fought 3,000 lawmen and Baldwin Felts detective agency strike breakers only ending when the United States Army arrived to contain the conflict. How did the situation become so dire that 10,000 miners, many of which were veterans of the Great War, take up arms against company management and agents of the law?

Background

As the United Mine Workers Union began to push further south into Mingo County West Virginia, spearheaded by Mother Jones, the prominent union organizer, the management of the mines began to retaliate against workers. Upon the move from 3,000 Mingo County Miners to vote for Unionization, the company began firing and evicting the workers and their families from their company homes with the help of the Baldwin Felts detective agency. While most lawmen were not generally seen as potential allies to the miner’s plight, one individual broke that mold. The Matewan police chief Sid Hatfield rejected the attempts of the Baldwin Felts agents to continue evictions of families and confronted them with a group of deputized miners. Albert Felts of the agency informed Sid Hatfield that he had a warrant for Hatfield which resulted in a shootout and the deaths of 7 Felts agents, 2 miners, and the mayor of Matewan, Cabell Testerman. The event galvanized union support and lionized Sid Hatfield as an icon of resistance against the mining companies.

On August 1st, Hatfield was summoned to McDowell County to stand trial on charges of dynamiting a coal tipple. Travelling with Hatfield was his good friend Ed Chambers and both of their wives. As they ascended the steps to the courthouse, Baldwin Felts detective agents ambushed them opening fire in an extrajudicial killing resulting in the deaths of both Hatfield and his friend Chambers. The news of the killing spread like wildfire to the miners who had come to idolize Hatfield as a champion of their cause. Miners began to take up arms in anger knowing that Hatfield had been ambushed and murdered. At a rally on August 7th, Mother Jones, the prolific union organizer, pleaded with miners not to resort to violence to no avail. The miners began gathering at lens creek mountain in preparation for an assault on Blair Mountain. 

The Battle of Blair Mountain

As skirmishes began President Warren G. Harding threatened to send in troops and B1 bombers to quell the insurrection. This threat worked at first by causing miners to return home but would ultimately fail as rumors of Logan County Sheriff Don Chafin attacking pro-union sympathizers and their families spread throughout the mountains. At news of Chafin’s continued acts of violence the miners took up arms again and began their march upon Blair Mountain. While the miners heavily outnumbered the lawmen, they were poorly armed and poorly organized resulting in little tactical gains. Chafin’s men had established superior fortifications and were able to outlast the barrage of Miners until the Army finally arrived. The conflict resulted in an estimated 50-100 miner deaths with nearly 1000 arrests. Nearly 30 lawmen lay dead from the armed revolt. While outwardly the result of the conflict was a massive victory for the coal industry and anti-union forces, the battle and its publicity raised awareness of the plight of coal miners and would ultimately result in major union victories later with the implementation of President Roosevelt’s New Deal.

The Battle of Blair Mountain stands as a particularly unique event in analyzing both class and racial solidarity. While the miners were largely white, there were black and immigrant workers such as Italians involved in the struggle. An interesting parallel between the events of the battle and other events of economic uprising is the reality that certain events supersede racial boundaries and racial protocols. Much like the populist movement and its agrarian focus, which encouraged instances of racial and class solidarity among farmers, the Battle of Blair Mountain stood as a significant example of racial and class solidarity in the face of economic tyranny. The economic situation of the miners and their response to oppression dismantled the racial protocols of the 1920s. 

While some scholars attempt to analyze parallels between the plight of West Virginia coal miners within a socialist framework with labor at its center, it is important to explore its inherent complexity. While the miners of West Virginia were certainly exploited and faced heinous conditions, their rebellion was not directed at capitalism as a system itself. Their rebellion stood solely in the direction of their actual oppressors, the mining companies. While other socialist revolutions feature prominent organizers and a large percentage of sympathizers throughout the country, the battle of Blair Mountain stood as a relatively small event in the world of the coal economy. The importance of the battle itself does not rely on a Marxist interpretation attempting to argue the inevitability of socialist revolutions throughout the world but to understand the significance of workers rights, the rule of law, and the commitment to fair and equitable economics without worker exploitation. The miners of West Virginia did not instigate a socialist revolution in the hopes of overthrowing their government and capitalism. Instead, they fought for their existence, their families, and the hope that the system would work fairly for them rather than exploit them in a radically unjust manner.

What do you think of the Battle of Blair Mountain? Let us know below.

Now, read Roy’s article on the Armenian Genocide here and the 1980s Guatemalan genocide here.

Bibliography

https://guides.loc.gov/chronicling-america-blair-mountain

https://appvoices.org/2021/09/02/battle-of-blair-mountain-centennial/

https://www.history.com/news/americas-largest-labor-uprising-the-battle-of-blair-mountain

https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/blair-mountain-ends/