A Chill in the Air Read online

  Today a friend arrives from Bologna. He says that there too discontent is widespread and violent. There are scenes in the streets of women clinging to men who are called up, as they leave. Bitter resentment is felt in all classes at being kept in the dark. I can find no traces of the violent anti-English or anti-French feeling so prevalent during the Abyssinian war; but anti-German feeling is rampant everywhere.

  A young typist, married a year ago and with a small baby, writes today from Florence to tell me that her husband has been called up and sent to Albania. A pitiful letter. “I know that thousands of wives and mothers are in the same position as I, and I feel very selfish at only going on thinking about myself – but I can’t help it… It isn’t only now. I go on thinking that one day my Fabrizio (the baby), for whom my husband and I have made such a lot of plans, will be taken away from me, as my husband is now. What’s the use of it all? What’s the use of struggling on? We don’t care how hard we work if only they’d leave us alone. But they won’t.”

  One and a half million men have now been called up. The expense must be terrific. For that reason, apart from all others, it seems impossible that the crisis can be delayed long.

  APRIL 13TH

  Late last night an official announcement on the radio declared that “unless exceptional circumstances arise” no more recruits will be called up. This statement certainly aims at calming the widespread uneasiness and discontent – it seems to have been immediately successful.

  The papers continue to have articles on the “encirclement policy” of Britain. Gayda says that Britain has no right to take a moral line about Albania while she occupies Gibraltar, which belongs to Spain – Suez, which belongs to Egypt – Malta, which belongs to Italy, and Palestine, which belongs to the Arabs.

  APRIL 14TH

  A story from Rome. Two members of the Fascist party are talking in a café. A. talks scornfully about Ciano: his abominable manners, his callowness, his pro-German policy. B. defends him: “He’s got the faults of youth, but he’s able and he’ll grow out of them”. The next day B. is sent for and told to give up his Party membership card. “But I defended Ciano!” he protests. “That’s not enough. You should have denounced your friend to the police.”

  MAY 12TH

  There is now a curious lull. In spite of Poland, in spite of the German staff officers at the Review in Rome on the 9th, in spite of all the propaganda in the press against the “encirclement” policy of the democracies (now fully believed in by everyone), the general public has decided that there won’t be a war, after all. The crowds listening to the radio bulletins in the squares and cafés are smaller; public works are in full swing; the theatres at the Florence Maggio Musicale are more crowded (though there are practically no foreigners) than I have ever seen them. That this temporary sense of security is deliberately fostered there can be no doubt (I heard it said of one man, who had been advising some English old ladies to go home, that he ought to be exiled as an alarmist). What lies behind it? Two things, I imagine. First, a wish to calm the agitation and discontent so prevalent last month, when war seemed imminent. But secondly – and more important – a determination to convince the general public that the real warmongers and alarmists are on the other side. The Fascist countries only want “peace and justice”. Thus, if war does come, public opinion will be prepared to believe that it is the democracies who are responsible, and that the Fascist countries have been forced into it in self-defence.

  MAY 13TH

  A sinister remark of Mussolini’s, said to an old friend (and official) in Romagna, who was asking him, a little anxiously, about the future: “Stai tranquillo, erediteremo ancora”.4 Inherit what? From whom? One can only inherit from the dead – in the sense that Austria and Czechoslovakia are now dead.

  MAY 14TH

  Mussolini’s speech this morning in Turin comes as a confirmation of what I wrote two days ago, about attempting to put the responsibility for war on to the democracies. The speech – which was received with greater enthusiasm than other recent ones – is extremely clever. While leaving Italians with a clear impression that their leader doesn’t want war, it prepares them – if war does come – to the belief that it is the democracies, in their “fury” against Germany and Italy, who have provoked it; meanwhile, they are to regard their own rearmament, which is to continue as hard as ever, as “a measure of self-protection, to safeguard the peace of Europe”. All this has gone down very well, and the headlines of today’s papers speak of “the grave responsibilities of the democracies”. Moreover, Dean Inge obligingly chose yesterday to say that “it is not Germany and Italy, but England, who will be responsible for war”, and to attack the “preponderant influence of the Jews on the press and the House of Commons”. His remarks have been quoted in even the smallest provincial papers here.

  And indeed, to the best of my belief, the truth is that Mussolini does not want war. He has never wanted a real war – only, at home, the “heroic” state of mind which its imminence produces (and which he achieved by such minor campaigns as Abyssinia and Spain) and abroad, the achievement of his expansionist aims. He does not want war now because he believes that he can achieve these aims without it. It remains to be seen whether he is right.

  MAY 16TH

  Yesterday Mussolini visited Cavour’s grave, and stood some time in meditation beside it. It was Cavour who said: “If we did for ourselves what we do for our country, we should be the greatest of blackguards”.

  JUNE 26TH

  The virulence of the recent press attacks on England and the open Schadenfreude over the events at Tientsin appear to be an echo of similar articles in Germany; the tone is that of nations already at war. It looks as if there would now be an unceasing blast of propaganda of this nature from now on until the autumn: as a preparation for war if necessary, otherwise as bluff. As propaganda, in these last two months, it seems to have failed in diminishing the average citizen’s instinctive dislike of Germany, but it has succeeded:

  1) in embedding the word and idea of “encirclement” in his mind;

  2) in convincing him that, if there is a war, “the democracies” (to repeat what is now the stock phrase in everybody’s mouth) “will be fighting for their privileges; Italy and Germany for their life.”

  JUNE 30TH

  I have heard on the radio an interesting piece of propaganda: a Catholic broadcast in Germany (I think from the Vatican) on the occasion of St. Peter’s Day. After an account of St. Peter’s life, persecution and death on the Cross, the preacher proceeded to an exhortation to the persecuted Christians of our time. “The Church”, he said, “has been hated and persecuted up to our own time… she will always be hated, because her thoughts are those of God and not of man. But the Church, through all persecutions, has always won. Peter died on the Cross, Peter is victorious.” The exhortation which then followed might have been addressed to the Early Christians of St. Peter’s own day. I wonder by whom it was heard in Germany, and under what conditions. The sermon ended with the words: “The Cross is our certain lot. In Christ ist Sieg und Heil.”

  JULY 2ND

  Lord Halifax’s speech at Chatham House has loosed a fresh torrent of invective against England. I heard the original on the radio and could hardly recognize it in the version that I read the next morning in the papers here. Actually the greater part of what he said was quoted (not quite all) – but the emphasis was so presented that it produced an impression of unmitigated hypocrisy and duplicity. It is now the belief of most Fascists that it may be possible to extract from England a portion of what they want from her (re-division of colonies, re-distribution of raw materials, “freedom in the Mediterranean”, etc.) but only by continued pressure and the constant menace (not reality) of war. They admit that this is a dangerous game (the more honest, even, that it is a revolting game) but say: “We’ve been forced into it. We have no other way of obtaining justice.” This policy is based on the belief, on the one hand, that England won’t fight if she can possibly
help it (not for idealistic reasons, but because the more prosperous of two adversaries is always the one who has most to lose) and on the other, that she will not yield anything except under the threat of violence. “If we show even a single sign of yielding, or of being prepared to meet her halfway, we are done for.”

  This appears to be deadlock.

  JULY 3RD

  Much has been made in the press of the “dangerous alarmism” and “decadent panic” of the democracies (especially England) in this last week, and especially over the weekend; it is contrasted, of course, with the “grim serenity” here. The tone of the papers, however, is so angry that one wonders what underlies it. Meanwhile the accounts of events in the Far East and in Palestine and, above all, of the negotiations with Russia, continue to present English foreign policy as tortuous, hypocritical and totally ineffective.

  JULY 4TH

  To me one of the most alarming – as well as ugliest – symptoms of the moment is the growing tendency (on both sides) to deny any sincerity or good faith to their opponents. If there is a naïveté in too blind a faith in the essential decency of human nature, there is also a naïveté of a more dangerous kind in denying any idealistic motives to one’s opponents. To do this is not only to make a psychological mistake; it is greatly to under-rate the strength of one’s enemy.

  JULY 5TH

  Yesterday, driving through Scandicci (where there is a large home for permanently disabled soldiers) I met, in his wheelchair, one of the most terrible “grands mutilés” of the 1914–18 war that I have ever seen. Both legs gone, blind, and most horribly disfigured – and still alive, after twenty years.

  And in 1959?

  JULY 6TH

  The latest caricature in La Stampa represents a singularly oafish and knock-kneed John Bull letting down his pants so that a small grinning Japanese soldier may prod his buttocks with a bayonet.

  JULY 7TH

  William Phillips (the US Ambassador and my godfather) who is here for the weekend, is determinedly optimistic in his certainty that war will be avoided this summer. He appears to base this conviction on the belief:

  a) that Germany is not yet ready for war – not being yet satisfied with the progress of her “peaceful” penetration in the Balkans;

  b) that Italy does not intend – if she can possibly avoid it – to fight at all.

  He admits, however, that one of the chief danger-points is Hitler’s belief (in spite of the speeches of Lord Halifax or anyone else) that England is now to be numbered among the “defeatist” peoples and that, to quote Mein Kampf, “in dealing with a people that has grown defeatist he (the victor-dictator) can then rely on the fact that no single one of these further acts of oppression will seem a sufficient reason to take up arms”. If he applies this theory to Danzig there will be war.

  On the other hand, William Phillips’ opinion is that in view of the recent trouble in Danzig there will now be a lull – which Italy will use quietly and unobtrusively to occupy some of the “ancient Venetian” cities of the Dalmatian coast – thus further strengthening her stranglehold on the Adriatic. Prince Paul of Yugoslavia (whom W.P. visited recently) is fully aware of this danger; and sees no means of defending those cities. Certainly no one else will. It may have been this move (among others) which Mussolini had in mind with his phrase “erediteremo ancora”.

  JULY 8TH

  A curious – and perhaps significant – change in the Italian press recently is the sympathetic tone now adopted towards Russia (even including the quotation of articles – anti-English ones of course – from the Pravda). As the official press now takes its tone from Germany, this suggests that there may be some foundation in the persistent rumours of a German-Russian rapprochement. William Phillips says that, according to the Russian chargé d’affaires in Rome (by far the ablest and best informed of all his colleagues), The Times has been quite unfailingly wrong over its account of the negotiations in Moscow. The truth about the progress of the negotiations (according to the news the Soviet diplomat received direct from Moscow) was generally the exact opposite of what The Times said; or, when the paper got the facts right, the interpretation was mistaken. Meanwhile there has been no reference whatever in Italy to the plans – already known in England and America – for the emigration of the population of the South Tyrol. That the 10,000 members of the population who are still German subjects should be transferred to the other side of the frontier is possibly desirable, but the choice offered to the rest of the German-speaking population (about 200,000) is a very grim one: either to move to Germany or to Southern Italy. As Catholics, and as ardent Austrian nationalists who bitterly resented the Anschluss, they cannot but dread coming under the Nazi régime (far more severe, as they have already learned, than the Fascist). But equally, a move to Southern Italy, among an alien population and in completely unfamiliar conditions, must be profoundly distasteful. And they have also the peasant’s deep attachment to their own bit of land. The point that is still uncertain is how much pressure will be used to force them to move.

  JULY 9TH

  Have been talking to William Phillips about America. He maintains that Congress’s rebuff to the President over the arms embargo appeared more serious than it really is – for if war should break out the country would be swung in the only way the US ever is swung: on a wave of emotion. He is convinced that in that case the embargo would immediately be withdrawn. He says that Roosevelt has already decided not to stand for the third time, but is only postponing his statement of this decision so as to keep some control over Congress; and he (W.P.) fears a violent isolationist reaction when this is known.

  A recent personal letter of the President’s to William Phillips emphasized the increased violence of American public opinion against Italy, as well as Germany.

  JULY 10TH

  The latest news of Schuschnigg is that he is going mad. The form of torture used has been to deprive him of any rest; loud-speakers in his room and the sudden flashing of lights day and night; a revolver left on his table, in the hope of driving him to suicide. This has failed, but now his mind is giving way.

  A few months ago William Phillips presented to Mussolini, unofficially, a proposal of Roosevelt’s for the settlement of the Jews. It was that if England were to give (as apparently she was then prepared to do) the greater part of Kenya for the formation of an independent Jewish State, Italy would also cede the portion of Southern Abyssinia adjoining with Kenya. The plan was to be financed by America, England and Jews all over the world; and the inducement offered to Italy was the influx of trade into Abyssinia that such a settlement would bring. But Mussolini refused to hear of it.

  The following puzzle is being circulated throughout the country, entitled Chi vincerà la guerra?5

  MUSSOLINI ?

  HITLER ?

  CHAMBERLAIN ?

  DALADIER ?

  CHI

  VINCERÀ ?

  The answer being the third letter downwards – STALIN.

  JULY 12TH

  Today a very intelligent Roman woman – a landscape gardener, who is on the executive committee of the 1942 Exhibition – has spent the day here. The figures being spent on the exhibition are fantastic: the estimate for the whole is three milliards (of lire). This includes a considerable number of permanent buildings: a Palazzo dell’Arte – a great church with a dome nearly as large as St. Peter’s – a model housing district – three artificial lakes (each four times as large as Piazza Venezia) – a great canal and so on.

  The estimate for flowers and plants alone is four million lire. Where can it all be coming from? The only encouraging aspect of it all is that surely even the present régime would not have the folly to spend so much on this work (which is proceeding steadily) if they seriously intended war.

  The same woman – herself very anti-Fascist (and with Jewish connections) reports the usual discontent with the German alliance and with the increasing restrictions in every field, material and intellectual. But when I asked her whether a
ny of her younger colleagues (those who have just left the University) would agree with her, she said, no. They have swallowed the Fascist theory whole. I was, however, interested to see how very well informed she and her friends manage to be – even about foreign news. Her brother-in-law has added a transmitting apparatus (made by himself) to his radio, and is in continual communication with friends in England.

  A little boy of ten, the son of one of my friends, was highly praised for his school essay, which was full of the most orthodox Fascist sentiments. When he brought home a rough copy, his mother asked him: “Do you really believe all this, Luigino?” “Oh no, mother, of course not! But it is the only way to get good marks.”

  JULY 13TH

  The news of the expulsion – at forty-eight hours’ notice – of all foreigners from the province of Bolzano came as a thunderbolt here – although already announced in the English papers and by the BBC on the evening of the 11th. Today articles in the papers attempt to minimize its importance, describing it as a “police measure” rendered necessary by discoveries of the OVRA6 of “the activities of certain members of Western nations” in the district. Still no reference whatever is made to the plan of evacuation of the Tyrolese population.