Americans may well think they alone won the War while Britons might also consider themselves the main characters. Certainly, growing up, I was under the impression my father won it single-handedly. But, based on casualties alone, the Soviet Union was in a league of its own, losing 20 million people at the very least, dwarfing the losses of Britain (450,000) and America (419,000). But the full support of the Soviet Union for the Allied cause may not have been secured if Winston Churchill and Josef Stalin hadn’t got completely muntered together one night in Moscow, in August 1942.
Winnie and Joe were not natural buddies. Churchill despised communism and not just because he was born into the British aristocracy. Stalin distrusted Churchill and saw his colonialism as ideologically opposed to his socialism. By the time they met, they both had good reason to be of foul temper. The war was going very badly. Germany had taken over much of Western Europe and Hitler’s forces were advancing on Stalingrad, having taken the Crimea and Rostov-on-Don. The British were being forced back in North Africa by Rommel and Mussolini, and were in danger of losing the entire Mediterranean to the Axis.
Churchill headed to Moscow to meet “the Ogre in his Den,” as his loving wife Clementine put it, to deliver bad news. He thought it best to tell Stalin in person that the Allies, even with America’s entry into the conflict, did not have the manpower, ships or tanks to open a Second Front in France that would divert Hitler’s resources sufficiently to allow the Soviets to repel the Nazi attack.
The signing of a treaty had already been ruled out as Britain would not accept the Soviet condition that her 1941 frontiers, that included some of Finland, the Baltic States and Bessarabia, be honoured. But it was vital that the Soviets did more than simply defend their land if the War was to be won.
The first meeting of the Second Moscow Conference saw Churchill, Stalin and US representative Averell Harriman endure ‘bleak and sombre’ talks. Stalin had devastating news about Soviet losses, while Churchill could only apologise with copious illustrations that there was to be no relief from the Allies. Stalin did not hide his disappointment.
“Why are you so afraid of the Germans?” he thundered, which was baffling considering he was losing 10,000 men to them daily.
The next day Stalin produced an aide-mémoire that ignited Churchill’s ire.
“You British are afraid of fighting. You should not think the Germans are supermen. You will have to fight sooner or later. You cannot win a war without fighting".
Churchill lost his temper, after all Britain had been through to this point, thumping his fist on the table and giving an impassioned speech that the interpreter could not keep up with. Stalin couldn’t understand the words, but he was moved by the spirit in which he spoke and they parted on good terms.
Churchill and Sir Alexander Cadogan, from the Foreign Office, were put up in State Villa No. 7, a large luxurious dacha, decorated gaudily but with no expense spared. Assured that it was bugged, Churchill ranted for the benefit of those listening in.
“The Russians, I have been told, are not human beings at all. They are lower in the scale of nature than the orangutan. Now then, let them take that down and translate it into Russian.”
Quite how this was supposed to help is unclear, but insults of this nature were not uncharacteristic of the British war leader.
The next day saw a banquet in Catherine The Great’s state rooms with 100 guests. It was not the intimate gathering Churchill felt was required for the leaders to reach an understanding. Nineteen courses and vast amounts of booze were consumed, along with countless dreary toasts. Churchill was utterly pissed off. Nothing had been achieved. After coffee and more liquor Stalin wanted Churchill to watch a movie with him, but Churchill was in no mood to Netflix and chill. He told Cadogan to prepare to leave in the morning.
When that morning arrived, the British Prime Minister was persuaded to make one last attempt at diplomacy. It would be difficult, especially as Stalin liked to lay in until 11.30am, as he regularly went to bed at 4am. Churchill was no stranger to late nights on the sauce either, but he still rose early, and preferred the afternoon nap to the lie-in.
They managed a courteous meeting in the early evening before Stalin invited Churchill back to his apartment “for a few drinks,” accompanied briefly by his daughter Svetlana and his right hand man, Vyacheslav Molotov, who was better known for his cocktails.
The lads got right on it, chatting warmly about their lives and families, and by the time Lord Cadogan came to collect the old coot, the apartment revealed a scene of devastation, with empty bottles of champagne and sparkling Georgian red wine strewn everywhere and evidence of ravaged pork, beef, chicken and fish.
“There I found Winston and Stalin, and Molotov who had joined them, sitting with a heavily-laden board between them: food of all kinds crowned by a sucking pig, and innumerable bottles… Everyone seemed to be as merry as a marriage bell.”
With a treaty out of the question, the pair instead agreed a joint communique about 2.30am that would have been no comfort to Hitler:
“A number of decisions were reached covering the field of war against Hitlerite Germany, and her associates in Europe. The just war of liberation both Governments are determined to carry on with all their power and energy until the complete destruction of Hitlerism and any similar tyranny has been achieved…. Reaffirming the close friendship and understanding between the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States of America…”
OK, booze didn’t win the War, but it did lubricate and ultimately cement key alliances that would change the course of history. It helped bridge an idealogical divide.
“Conditions have been established in which messages exchanged between the two will mean twice as much, or more, than they did before,” reported Cadogan.
That’s what getting on the lash can do for you. Only MDMA could have achieved more.
So could booze help facilitate peace in today’s conflicts? Volodymyr Zelensky looks like a guy who enjoys a pint, but Vladimir Putin is not known to be much of a drinker. Also, Putin likes to be seated alone at the end of an enormous table, like a Vlady No Mates, which would make rapprochement problematic.
What about Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh? Netanyahu is not against alcohol consumption, though he too is not known to be a big boozer despite the barroom-brawler vibes. Haniyeh abides by Islamic law however, so doesn’t drink, making the clinking of Israeli and Palestinian glasses a non-starter, quite aside from the more substantial obstacles.
With President Joe Biden choosing sobriety too, this party is going to need more than balloons to affect the jolly bonhomie required for progress. Not that a Trump victory would help. He doesn’t drink and nobody in their right mind would want to see him try, given how little sense he makes sober.
The world deserves better, drunker, leadership.
So while this little essay might appear to be glib, please look at the current suggestions for resolving the globally disastrous conflicts in Israel and Ukraine – such as the concession of territory or facilitating massacre – and tell me that being under the table is a less sensible option than what is on it at present.
Or…
Image credit: By National Museum of the U.S. Navy - Lot 11596-7, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=70727525