Naturally enough, these circumstances have strengthened the government’s position. But the movement against Chamberlain and Co. is growing. A few days ago the powerful National Union of Railwaymen (Marchbank is its general secretary) passed a unanimous resolution demanding Chamberlain’s resignation. This made a strong impression on political circles. Similar developments can be observed at present among miners, metalworkers and others. The article by Tucker, leader of the metalworkers, in Reynolds News is very symptomatic.

The Tories are divided on Chamberlain. Chamberlain has a definite majority in the Conservative faction elected to parliament back in 1935. But the Tory majority across the country (especially in the army, navy and air force), whose sentiments have changed radically since 1935, is definitely against him. On the other hand, the City, the Court and the party machine are in favour. The result is a very tangled knot. It becomes ever clearer that the top bourgeoisie wants to keep Chamberlain and Co. in government at any cost, as a guarantee that the Cabinet will not dare squeeze the privileges of the capitalist elite too hard in the interests of ‘victory over Hitler’. This elite does not fully trust Churchill. It considers him an ‘adventurer’ and a ‘romantic’ who can probably win the war but is unfit for the role of Cerberus to guard their bags of gold. A Tory MP clearly defined the position of the party majority at the meeting of the parliamentary Conservatives on 3 June. He said: ‘We shall on no account let a “left-wing” government be imposed on us under the pretext of war.’

The first version assumes that the interests of the USSR and Germany are mutually contradictory and that they must collide sooner or later, whatever Berlin’s and Moscow’s wishes to the contrary. This is the view of the Foreign Office, which formulates its policy accordingly.

The second version assumes that the Soviet Union is now banking on a world revolution and views powerful British capitalism as the main obstacle in the path to such a revolution. Therefore, the USSR aims first and foremost at bringing England to ruin and at destroying the City, after which the road to the revolution will be clear. Hence the Soviet Union’s support of Germany and its hostility towards England. This is the view taken by many diplomats.

Regarding the situation following France’s defeat, Aras says: if Italy and Germany decide to occupy Syria, Turkey should actively intervene.

Attlee invited Negrín to dinner a few days ago. It was an entirely private affair at Noel-Baker’s place. During dinner, Attlee asked Negrín ‘in the most cordial fashion’… to leave England. Needless to say, the British government will never expel Negrín from the country! Negrín, it goes without saying, is guaranteed the right to sanctuary in England! If he so wishes, he can stay here as long as he likes! But… the British government would be infinitely obliged were Negrín to go to America ‘of his own accord’. His travelling expenses, visa, etc. would be taken care of.

Negrín was refused a visa and was invited to dinner again, this time by Alexander, who asked him quite politely but urgently to quit England. He recommended New Zealand; Webb, diary, 28 Nov. 1940, p. 6998.

The meaning of this request is clear. The British government is flirting with Franco. Hoare is sending one desperate telegram after another from Madrid; Negrín’s stay in London may spoil the mood of the Spanish dictator. Hence Attlee’s request to Negrín.

What vileness! What stupidity! Leaving aside considerations of generosity, which seem to be of little concern to the British government, this move is entirely unwise from the purely military and political points of view. It is most probable that despite all Hoare’s efforts, Franco will eventually side with Germany and Italy. Then the British government, of course, will try to employ Republican forces against him, and Negrín would prove most useful. It would seem, therefore, that the British government should look after Negrín in case they need him in future. Besides, it could use this very card against Franco. But no! The British government says to Negrín: ‘Would you be so kind as to get out!’

And the manner in which it is done! Oh, naturally, we’d never agree to hang you! We are far too pure and noble for that! We wouldn’t like to dirty our hands! But if you would be so kind as to hang yourself, we would be so grateful to you, so obliged!

Genuine, well-bred English hypocrisy.

And Attlee’s role? Churchill and Halifax don’t want to sully themselves, don’t you know, so the Labour Party leader willingly does the dirty work for them. European social democracy performs its historical mission.