There is a growing tendency towards a ‘united front’ without communists (Labourites, Liberals, the Conservative opposition, and Independent Progressives). Transport House is against it, of course, but the probing and groping for opportunities to form such a front are nonetheless ongoing. Cripps and Dalton, in particular, are engaged on this. I am sceptical: there is strong resistance to a united front in the Labour Party, while the Conservative opposition lacks determination. Moreover, the Tories are a motley crew. Also, one cannot rule out the possibility that Chamberlain, with a view to sowing confusion in the ranks of his Tory opponents, may offer ministerial posts to one or two of them. They may just fall for the bait. We’ll see. But it seems to me that, for the moment at least, prospects for a united front are slim.

Maisky’s predictions proved right once again. Stafford Cripps’s attempts to create a united front of the communists, the Social League (which he founded in 1937) and the Independent Labour Party were frustrated by Labour. Cripps was in fact expelled from the Labour Party in 1939; Clarke, The Cripps Version, pp. 65–7.

All the Labourites keep asking me anxiously whether we intend to ‘leave’ Europe? Do we propose to move to a policy of isolationism? The Labourites admit that after Munich the USSR has every moral right to turn its back on Europe and say: ‘You can stew and perish in your own juice.’ Yet they all beseech me: ‘Don’t leave!’ For our withdrawal would mean the final breakdown of democratic forces and the absolute triumph of the reactionary policies of Chamberlain. Meanwhile, the Labourites are hoping that the masses will recover from their recent shock in due course and progressive forces will begin to build up once more. Our ‘presence’ in Europe might facilitate this process enormously.

‘Your conversations with the Labourites,’ responded Litvinov, ‘produce the impression that the latter are quite helpless. The immediate future evidently belongs to Chamberlain.’ Litvinov had become sceptical of the ability of the British ‘to oppose the onslaught of the aggressors even if they want to’; SPE, p. 65; G. Roberts, ‘The fall of Litvinov: A revisionist view’, Journal of Contemporary History, 27/4 (1992), p. 646.

Interestingly, Vansittart, showing great concern, asked me the same question when we had lunch together today. In his opinion, the situation will become clearer by the beginning of 1939 and take a turn for the better; moreover, the Germans are likely to do some foolish things in the intervening period. As for Vansittart himself, he does not intend to leave the Foreign Office, contrary to the rumours that have been circulating. He will stay on and fight for his line. He would very much like the USSR to ‘remain’ in Europe.

(I responded to them all in the same way: the USSR is disgusted by the behaviour of Western powers, but does not intend to take any hasty steps. We are studying the current situation and keeping a close eye on it. We’ll draw conclusions in due time. This seems to more or less satisfy them.)

Incidentally, Dalton explained to me the essence of Chamberlain’s foreign-policy ‘philosophy’, citing highly competent sources. Here it is. All international affairs must be regulated by truly great powers, of which there are six: the USA, the British Empire, Germany (with its vassals), Japan (with its empire) and the USSR. Chamberlain has no doubts concerning the participation of the first four powers in the world directorate, but what should be done with the USSR? Nothing has occurred to him as yet. France is to become Britain’s ‘satellite.’ There may be a struggle for Italy between London and Berlin. All the other countries will serve as small change in transactions between members of the ‘directorate’. Not bad! Real ‘super-imperialism’!

Dalton also mentioned that Henderson, the British ambassador in Berlin, told him right after his appointment last year: the object of my mission is to form an Anglo-German alliance. He let it be understood that this was the prime minister’s point of view. The very same Henderson developed the following theory: to satisfy Germany’s colonial claims, it is necessary to draw up a subscription list for each colonial power to make its donation. Would Hitler be satisfied with such a solution? I doubt it.

The German embassy lodged a protest against Morrison’s speech in parliament on 4 October.