********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: H-Net Staff <revh...@mail.h-net.msu.edu>
Date: Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:15 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Niebuhr on Gerolymatos, 'An International
Civil War: Greece, 1943-1949'
To: h-rev...@h-net.msu.edu


André Gerolymatos.  An International Civil War: Greece, 1943-1949.
New Haven  Yale University Press, 2016.  432 pp.  $25.00 (paper),
ISBN 978-0-300-18060-2.

Reviewed by Robert Niebuhr (Barrett, The Honors College, Arizona
State University)
Published on H-War (June, 2017)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey

André Gerolymatos has written a comprehensive study on perhaps the
most important period in modern Greek history. His volume provides a
nice balance between showing the reader the larger historical
significance while still venturing into detail that brings the story
some life.  Specialists in Balkan/Greek studies should find this
study inclusive and accessible while nonspecialists should appreciate
the adequate context throughout the narrative that neither strays too
far afield nor ends up trapping the reader in tangential specifics.
This book accomplishes for Greek history in the period of World War
II and the earliest years of the Cold War what Stevan Pavlowitch has
done for Yugoslavia in the same period (_Hitler's New Disorder: The
Second World War in Yugoslavia_, 2008). In that way, Gerolymatos
chronicles just how chaotic the Nazi occupation was for Greeks,
especially those in Athens, and sets up how this chaos spurred the
challenge over creating a post-Nazi government.

Divided into nine substantive chapters, the book provides a complex
and nuanced topic with a logical platform. Gerolymatos starts with an
overview of the creation of the modern Greek state and gives some
contextual notes regarding the political situation in Greece on the
eve of World War II. This sort of background clearly helps
nonspecialists but I think this is actually one of the weaker
sections of the book in part because it misses an opportunity.
Specifically, these introductory remarks set up how divided Greece
was, especially given the refugees from Asia Minor by the 1920s, but
it does not go into enough detail regarding the history of Marxist
groups during this critical period. Since the civil war in Greece
took on a form that roughly corresponded to a generic Left versus
Right, it would have been instructive to learn more about the few
Greek Communists who operated prior to World War II. Were these
thinkers or writers in exile between the wars, did they spend time in
the Soviet Union, were they educated in Vienna? There may have been
only a few Communists, but this is a critical point when considering
aspects of the civil war once the Nazis retreated. For instance, how
could the Communist Party of Greece (Kommounistikó Kómma Elládas,
or_ _KKE) construct a legitimate government, win support from or be
powerful enough to bully the people, or simply act as a puppet of
foreign Communist powers? All of those dilemmas posed serious
challenges to the KKE's potential success, but in a broader sense the
lack of a powerful domestic movement would likely have doomed the KKE
regime to resemble the Nazi puppet state during the war.

There are a host of names, acronyms, and groups in this
story--something that undergraduates would surely bemoan--but
Gerolymatos does a nice job of keeping the reader on track. Chapters
unfold in a largely chronological fashion, which makes the book easy
to follow.  This reviewer had the most interest in the later
chapters, especially when one considers the larger Cold War struggle
that had already emerged by 1947. Intersected with the Cold War
contests for power, issues of identity become apparent in this
history, as Greeks continued to struggle over not only what type of
political system they would follow (i.e., which system had legitimacy
by the end of the war) but also who they were as Greeks. A nice
background to this aspect, including the so-called Macedonian
Question from the nineteenth century, helps us understand how
important identity politics had become in the 1940s. These two
realms--the political and the personal--were intertwined; for
instance, Gerolymatos recounts how the BBC's Kenneth Matthews
reported on how various sides used identity as a test: "Is
Thessalonica a Greek or a Bulgarian City?" (p. 225).

Thessalonica, of course, was not limited to a contest between
Bulgaria and Greece but also included the motivated Yugoslav regime
in the north. Josip Broz Tito had a hand in nearly all of the major
events in the region, from activity in Austrian Carinthia and Trieste
in the north to the domination of Enver Hoxha's Albanian state and
support for the KKE in its struggle for power in Athens. Yugoslavia's
expansion not only in Vardar Macedonia but farther south would have
been a boon to Belgrade's domestic legitimacy and represented an
ambition to "dominate the Balkans" (p. 200). We see key players
mentioned briefly in this volume, including Svetozar
Vukmanović-Tempo, who oversaw Tito's plans for the southern reaches
of the refashioned Yugoslavia, but it is important to note that other
key Yugoslavs had been hard at work to control Albania since 1943.
Milovan Djilas was involved in planning that determined the postwar
Albanian state budget, and other Partisan veterans were trying to
figure out how and where to invest in Albania to maximize economic
output. Given the porous border Albania shares with Greece, a
Yugoslav presence in Tirana would help Tito dominate other junior
Communist partners in the Balkans. Despite all of that, it is
curious, given how completely Yugoslavia dominated Albania until the
middle of 1948, that Gerolymatos expounds without critique on Nikos
Zachariadis's claim that his KKE could count on the support of
Albania (p. 265). Hoxha was hardly in control of his own state, even
after the Tito-Stalin split, let alone thinking about aiding a
rebellion on his southern border. This critical juncture is precisely
why more detailed information on Greek Communists during the 1920s
and 30s would have added to the larger historical narrative; it could
have clarified the limitations on the KKE and its historical
relationship with neighboring parties.

Finally, the book helps illustrate that the early Cold War was
instructive as a testing ground for policymakers. Tito learned a lot
from these escapades--as a result, his flexibility with respect to
policy became a hallmark of his regime. Stalin and Truman learned a
lot too, as Gerolymatos points out, in terms of how to deal with
other flashpoints in what would become a global cold war: "If we are
tough enough now," Truman said, and "stand up to them like we did in
Greece," then the Soviets would restrain their foreign policy (p.
295). Linkages like those with Tito and the superpowers make this
story relevant for people who want to understand better the role of
ideology, power, and statecraft in the twentieth century.

Citation: Robert Niebuhr. Review of Gerolymatos, André, _An
International Civil War: Greece, 1943-1949_. H-War, H-Net Reviews.
June, 2017.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=49482

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.

 --



-- 
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to