Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The bitterly fought civil war in Spain between 1936 and 1939 was no local affair.
policy of non-intervention, the Spanish Civil War saw countries, interest groups and
individuals within and outside Europe overtly and covertly provide support to the
It is estimated that at the time of the military coup in July 1936 the Republicans had
available about 87,000 troops and the Nationalists about 77,000 troops.1 By the Civil
War’s end, it is estimated that well over 1 million men had been involved in fighting.2
Whilst both sides made use of conscription, the indigenous Spaniards were joined by
volunteers from supporters from both sides such as the International Brigade and
Germany’s Legion Condor. In addition to troops, the conflict saw significant escalation
in arms and equipment. Having successfully imposed units in such areas as Pamplona,
Burgos and Seville, the Nationalists laid siege to Madrid for 3 years and, during this
time from their western strongholds, swept across Spain, taking control of areas and
effectively isolating Barcelona and Madrid until, eventually, Republican Madrid fell.
That foreign intervention was the main reason for the Nationalists’ success is the most
Thomas, with Brennan emphasising how there was ‘little to choose’ in terms of the
political and strategic capability in either side.3 The Nationalists and the Republicans
were in need of assistance because Spain had not undergone the massive industrial
and economic reform experienced by most other European countries by the 1930s,
which meant that they could not mass produce weapons and equipment needed for
a major conflict. In his seminal work, Brown noted how important foreign military
indicating that whichever side could gain and make use of the greatest foreign aid
would win the War. 4 Both sides were able to access aid from sources sympathetic to
or supportive of them: the Nationalists received aid from Germany, Italy and Portugal;
whilst the Republicans received support from the Soviet Union, Mexico and
Agreement, which proscribed the sale of arms and the provision of troops to the
warring sides in the Spanish Civil War. This Agreement, famously honoured more in
the breach by some nations, was relevant to the outcome of events given that three
of the signatories, Britain, France and the United States, whilst recognizing the
Other commentators argue that the role of foreign intervention has been
3 Brennan, G (1950). The Spanish Labyrinth Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.518
4 Brown, Harry. ‘Spain’s Civil War 2nd Edition’ Addison Wesley Longman 1983, New York, p.77
2
exaggerated. Some place greater focus and emphasis on the Republicans’ military
inexperience, lack of cohesion and common purpose, and poor leadership. Borkeneau,
for example, is critical of the Republican rear guard and its failure to gain popular
support, and the infighting between the various political parties and ideologies
constituting the Republican cause, which represented an inefficient and unstable War
entity. Others, including Preston, contend that the leadership and strategy of General
Francisco Franco was in fact key to the Nationalists’ success. Alternatively, Raguer has
placed great emphasis on the Church’s role in the War and its influence upon
Spaniards, quoting the French historian, Hermet, that the Spanish Civil War should be
Nationalists’ victory in the Spanish Civil War is best explained by the non-intervention
of some countries, the unsuccessful intervention of the Soviet Union and the
before the War had really begun. To understand what led to the decision being made,
one must look at the context of Europe at the time. Preston writes of how to a
contemporary statesman the Spanish Civil War was only the latest conflict in twenty
years of ‘European Civil War’ and that since the Russian Revolution, the main goal of
European states had been to prevent the spread of radical left thought however
possible; thus explaining the reluctance of France and Great Britain to risk any
5 Raguer, H Gunpowder and Incense: The Catholic Church and the Spanish Civil War. (2007) New York: Routledge. 2007, p.1
3
involvement in the Spanish Civil War 6 albeit that the French Prime Minister, Leon
Blum, had originally planned to aid the Republicans because he feared a fascist Spain,
Toward the mid-point of the War, in January 1937, Great Britain’s Secretary of State
“The Spanish civil war has ceased to be an internal Spanish issue and has become an
international battle-ground. The Character of the future Government of Spain has now
become less important to the peace of Europe than that the dictators should not be
victorious in that country. The extent and character of the intervention now practised
by Germany and Italy have made it clear to the world that the object of these Powers
is to secure General Franco’s victory whether or not it represents the will of the Spanish
people.”8
This analysis shows that the British were fully aware of the situation in Spain and the
threat it poses to Europe. The fact that this is ignored should be attributed to the Non-
Other countries found a way to get around the Agreement to intervene in the conflict.
Early in the War, the Germans disguised their support for the Nationalists by providing
resources through Portugal. Lacking the assistance of France, Britain and the United
States, the Republic relied on the Soviet Union for help as well as the volunteers from
4
the International Brigade9. Thus, the Republicans had the support of one superpower,
who lacked organisation and came to lose morale and interest; whilst the Nationalists
had the full support of two great powers, Italy and Germany, at no financial cost. Non-
intervention would prove to be critical: as Anthony Beevor put it, the Non-
had Britain and France become involved, it is assumed that they would have assisted
the Republic, perhaps swinging the entire momentum of the War. Thus, the impact of
non-intervention on the Spanish Civil War as strictly applied by certain, key foreign
powers including Britain, France and the USA appears to be that the Nationalists had
Intervention Agreement, Hitler himself stated to the Italian Foreign Minister (Count
Galleazzo Ciano) in September 1940 ‘Italy and Germany did a great deal for Spain in
1936… without the aid of both countries there would be no Franco today’,11. Hitler
would typically seek to accentuate his own role; however, his contribution, as
personnel, and 200 tanks’, 12 from the Germans excluding the near 12,000 strong
9
Borkeneau, Franz. The Spanish Cockpit An Eyewitness Account of the Political and Social Conflicts of the Spanish Civil War.
London: Faber & Faber, 1937. Print,. p.266
10 Anthony Beevor interview: http://www.historyextra.com/feature/spain%E2%80%99s-very-international-civil-War
11 Casanova, J (2010). The Spanish Republic and Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.208
12 Knight, P ‘The Spanish Civil War’, Hodder & Stoughton 1998, London, p.74
5
Condor Legion. 13 In addition to the sheer quantity of hardware and personnel,
consideration must be given to the quality of what was provided by Germany. Sources
have noted the relative differences between German and Soviet supplied hardware;
the experience of the volunteers; and the training provided, with reference being
Indeed, it is notable that de Men has written positively and in great detail about the
impact of German assistance particularly given the fact that the subject of his book is
Franco, and, thus, it is to be expected that foreign intervention would take a lesser
role when considering Franco and the reasons for the Nationalist’s victory.
The Italian intervention had a massive impact on the Spanish Civil war in terms of
sheer numbers. Despite Mussolini initially pledging minimal assistance, hoping that
the rebellion would succeed within weeks and that he would gain an important ally
and propaganda victory ‘on the cheap’. 15 Italy would ultimately contribute up to
80,000 volunteers including 30,000 of his elite Black Shirts division. The Italians also
made significant material contributions, including: 2,500 tons of bombs, and 1,200
machine guns. 16 As with the German contribution, those fighting on the Nationalists’
side were professionals with extensive military experience and training. Andrew
Forrest has written of how the Republic won a ‘propaganda coup’ when it was
discovered that the Corpo di Truppe Volontarie was mainly made up of professional
Italian units and Fascist Blackshirts.17 Whilst Forrest seeks to argue that this detracts
13
De Men, R ‘Franco and the Spanish Civil War’ (2001) Routledge, London, p.94
14 Carr, R (1993). ’The Spanish Tragedy’ London: Weidenfield, p.139.
15 Carr, R (1993). ’The Spanish Tragedy’ London: Weidenfield, p.137.
16 Blinkhorn, M (1996). Democracy and Civil War in Spain 4th ed. London: Routledge, p.49
17 ‘The Spanish Civil War’ by Andrew Forrest. Routledge, 2000, London, UK, p.60
6
from the merit of the intervention as it perhaps led to scepticism against the
significant point is that the Nationalists had experienced fighters on their side,
whereas the Republicans had mostly volunteers with no military background, many of
who joined the conflict because of their personal ideologies. Accordingly, and if it is
accepted that the nationalists secured victory principally because of their military
resources, understanding and skill; it must follow that foreign intervention was
It incorrect to say that the Republicans received limited foreign assistance. The reality
is that the Republic received many men and supplies mostly from, but not limited, to
the Soviet Union. Soviet aid started in late autumn of 1936 and would ultimately
amount to around 350 tanks, 1200 to 1500 artillery pieces, 600–800 aircraft, and
500,000 rifles by the end of the War.18 Prior to the 1930s, the Soviets had had limited
dealings with the Spanish Government. In addition to the hardware already referred
to, the Republicans were provided with military advisors and support – the People’s
Commissariat for Internal Affairs (the NKVD) – as well as receiving support from the
Britain France, The United States among other countries, all ready to fight for the
protection of socialism against fascism. 19 This is interesting given the fact that
officially speaking non of these countries were supposed to be involved in the war
7
undermining the negative effect that the non-intervention agreement was supposed
Whilst this would seem to demonstrate that foreign intervention was not so important
to outcome, because both sides of the Civil War were reasonably well matched in
terms of military hardware and troops, separate to quantities, there were qualitative
prevent fascism / tyranny. Consequently many were idealists and artists lacking
quality and inconsistent supply given the difficulties with the route from the Soviet
Union to Spain. In contrast, supplies and support from Germany, Italy and others
remained reliable, constant and of good quality. Additionally, and ultimately, through
support from the International Brigades diminished and the Soviet supply shipments
began to irrevocably decline, highlighted in March 1938 when the Prime Minister,
deposit of 500 metric tons of gold in exchange for continued aid, which the Soviets
the Nationalists benefitted consistently throughout the Civil War; a factor that must
Turning away from foreign intervention, Borkeneau and Seidman considers that the
8
seeds of defeat lay in the Republic itself, which was simply too chaotic and divided to
present a sufficiently strong resistance. It is argued that the Socialist Government, led
by Francisco Largo Caballero, was ineffective; and that, as its power diminished, an
unsuitable and awkward coalition of various parties and unions was formed. ‘The
Madrid Government and general staff have shown a startling incapacity for the
The worker and the bourgeois, in reality deadly enemies, are fighting side by
side. This uneasy alliance is known as the Popular Front (or, in the Communist
combination with about as much vitality, and about as much right to exist, as
a pig with two heads or some other Barnum and Bailey monstrosity.22
This writing shows how disunited the Republicans were and that due to their opposing
ideologies they were unable to mount a war effort that would prove functional.
claiming that his government was “master of the situation” 23 The lack of cohesion and
united purpose is highlighted by Borkeneau, who highlighted how lucky Franco was
This would seem to indicate that it was the Republic’s mistakes that cost them than
21
Letter from Andre Marty to the General Consul of the Soviet Union (11th Oct. 1936) http://spartacus-
educational.com/FRmarty.htm
22“Spilling the Spanish beans” George Orwell notes from New English Weekly,
http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/scw/orwell2.htm
23 Preston, P (2006). The Spanish Civil War London: Harper, p.101
9
According to Seidman a lack of organisational acumen in the logistical and economic
aspects of the Republican government also lies at the root of the failed defense of the
Republic. This is recognized by Seidman, who wrote of how the Republic were
“incapable” of maintaining the gritty, trench based warfare the Spanish Civil War
involved. That despite inheriting all of Spain’s existing industry and finances the
Nationalists proved “logistically superior”, that despite the great victories at Teruel
The absence of significant victories over the Nationalists over the course of the War
does tend to point toward the conclusion that the Republicans themselves lost the
Civil War rather than the nationalists winning it. Indeed, the limitations of the
Republicans appeared to be apparent by 1937: “The way the north was lost, especially
the lack of commitment by the rank and file to the grand causes of the Republic
anticipated the rest of the conflict … individuals would be more concerned with the
fate of the patrias chicas of home, family and friends than with the larger entities of
state and nation”.24 Furthermore, George Orwell suspected that the Government was
not committed to achieving outright victory and that what it was “playing for is a
compromise that would leave the war situation essentially in being” on the basis that
more afraid of the revolution than of the Fascists”.25 Whilst this criticism would seem
to imply that the Republic’s own faults gifted the war to the Nationalists, Orwell also
10
concedes that the rebellion would “have gone less far” had it not been for foreign
intervention. 26 Orwell spent significant time on the front lines and thus clearly
recognised the impact of foreign intervention due to the disparity in equipment and
What, then, of the Generalissimo? Much has been written about the ineffectiveness
of Franco’s military strategy, his failing to seal victory in the early stages of the War
and his prolonging the conflict at some points, even casting into doubt his ability to
win the War at all. Indeed, whilst his leftist enemies labelled him as a “slow witted
mediocrity”, Franco’s own allies and associates have criticised his military
competency.27 Hitler described Franco as “very lucky” to have the benefit of German
and Italian assistance;28 and Mussolini went as far as to predict the defeat of Franco
to his Foreign Minister, Ciano, saying “the reds are fighters. Franco is not.”29 Given
(unusually) that these are not public boastings on behalf of Mussolini or Hitler to
attempt to show off their own strengths, these comments would tend to demonstrate
a genuine lack of faith in Franco’s ability to win the War for the Nationalists. Early in
the conflict there was a consensus in the foreign press that the Civil War would be
over before the start of 1937.30 There did seem to be a clear aim in Franco’s mind, he
determined to consolidate territory rather than deal the ‘final blow’.32 An example of
this is in the fall of Bilbao in July 1937, where Franco did not use the momentum of his
26 Orwell, G ibid.
27Preston, Paul (1994) General Franco as a military leader. The transactions of the Royal Historical Society: sixth serie,s p. 21
28
Trevor-Roper, H.R. (2000) Hitler's Table Talk 1941–1944. New York: Enigma Books, p.569
29 Ciano, Diary 37-38, p.148
30 Ribeiro de Menses (2001). Franco and the Spanish Civil War. London: Routledge, p.40
31 Quoted in Preston, P (2006). The Spanish Civil War London: Harper, p.160
32 Preston, Paul (1994) General Franco as a military leader. The transactions of the Royal Historical Society: sixth series, p.23
11
overwhelming victory to conquer the North. This drew harsh criticism from one of his
closest aides, Alfredo Kindelán, one of the original generals involved in planning the
revolution with Franco,33 who said “The enemy was defeated but was not pursued; the
success was not exploited, the withdrawal was not turned into a disaster.”34
This substantial criticism, and Franco’s inability to secure an early victory would tend
to suggest not only that Franco was not intrinsic to the Nationalist victory, but that
he may well have possibly hindered it. Preston has argued that whilst foreign
intervention must be recognised, Franco’s role was crucial because of his actions in
coordinating and channeling the aid and assistance into an effective effort within
Spain. He is also credited with strategic acumen. Preston argues that the early delays
were intended by Franco, in Preston’s words: “Franco had fought a political war, he
did not set out to emulate Napoleon”35, meaning that Franco considered that a more
effective and long lasting victory would be secured by decimating the Republican
forces and securing his position through the spread of terror. Preston does concede,
however, that Franco was only able to do so thanks to the efforts of foreign
intervention. Franco was able to earn credit unquestionable victory, but this was
owed to the aid he received, the Germans had the “decisive voice” in the hugely
writing 'we are practically in charge of the entire business without any of the
33
Preston, P (1993). Franco. London: Harper, p. 192
34 [Alfredo Kindelán] quoted in Preston, Paul (1994) General Franco as a military leader. The transactions of the Royal Historical
Society: sixth serie,s p.22
35 Preston, Paul (1994) General Franco as a military leader. The transactions of the Royal Historical Society: sixth series, p.40
12
some as a military genius who’s tactics led to an undisputable victory he was
and uniting the Nationalist movement, of which he then secured control. Franco
recognised that there were two factions within the Nationalists who posed a threat:
the Falangists, founded by Jose Primo de Rivera and the Confederación Española de
Derechas Autónomas (CEDA), led by Jose María Gil Robles, aimed at defending
Franco allowed the Falangist leadership crisis to play out, with Manuel Hedilla
eventually defeating Agustín Aznar for the leadership becoming ‘el Jefe’ before
Spaniard is the Nationalist cause’s links with the Church, which, Raguer has argued,
would prove vital to be victorious in a war in a heavily Catholic country. Despite the
uprising not being called in the name of protecting the faith, the Catholic Church
quickly took the Nationalists’ side lending them their “not inconsiderable”38 influence
over the people to Franco’s cause. The Republicans’ persecution of Catholics, led to
37 Casanova, J (2010). The Spanish Republic and Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.344
38 Casanova, J (2010). The Spanish Republic and Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.210
13
Goma, saw “Franco’s cause as God’s cause” 39 and believed that the enthusiastic
approach the Church took in the conflict had a key role in Nationalist victory, as it
helped capture the hearts and minds of the people, a vital asset in any rebellion. He
wrote, “The Church has applied the full weight of her prestige, which has been placed
at the service of truth and justice, to bring about the triumph of the National Cause.”40
It has to be recognised that the Church and its supporters is likely to emphasise, even
over emphasise, the significance of its role and involvement. Historians such as
Casanova and Brown have sought to put into context the assessment of the Spanish
Church and its actions, suggesting that the Church’s role is somewhat insignificant
To conclude, the Nationalist victory in the Spanish civil war can be explained by a range
of different reasons. The Republicans were successful at the beginning of the War,
however, as the War progressed, Soviet and International Brigade support began to
lessen numerically and in effectiveness and the course of the War changed.
militarily more effective in terms of organisation and unity, and had the benefit of a
strong general in Francisco Franco. The strongest argument, however, is that the
Nationalists would not have succeeded without the intervention of foreign states,
39 Preston, P The Spanish Holocaust: Inquisition and Extermination in Twentieth-Century Spain (2012)
London, Harper Press, p.210
40 Raguer, H Gunpowder and Incense: The Catholic Church and the Spanish Civil War. (2007) New York: Routledge. 2007, p55
41 Raguer, H Gunpowder and Incense: The Catholic Church and the Spanish Civil War. (2007) New York: Routledge. 2007, p1
14
principally, Germany and Italy. It was this foreign intervention that was ultimately the
most important reason for the Nationalists victory on the 1st of April 1939.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
1. Borkeneau, Franz. The Spanish Cockpit An Eyewitness Account of the Political
and Social Conflicts of the Spanish Civil War London: Faber & Faber, 1937.
Print.
3. Marty, Andre ‘Letter to the General Consul of the Soviet Union’ (11th Oct.
1936) http://spartacus-educational.com/FRmarty.htm
5. Orwell, George “Spilling the Spanish beans” (1937) notes from New English
Weekly, http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/scw/orwell2.htm
6. Trevor-Roper, Hugh. ‘Hitler's Table Talk 1941–1944’ New York: Enigma Books,
2000
Secondary Sources
1. Beevor, Anthony. Interview:
http://www.historyextra.com/feature/spain%E2%80%99s-very-international-
civil-War
15
2. Blinkhorn, Martin. Democracy and Civil War in Spain 4th ed. London:
Routledge 1996
4. Brown, Harry. ‘Spain’s Civil War 2nd Edition’ Addison Wesley Longman 1983,
New York
6. Casanova, Julián (2010). The Spanish Republic and Civil War. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
7. De Men Ribeiro de Felipe ‘Franco and the Spanish Civil War’ (2001) Routledge,
London.
9. Jurado, Carlos ‘The Condor Legion: German Troops in the Spanish Civil War’.
Osprey Publishing Ltd., 2006, Great Britain
10. Knight, Patricia ‘The Spanish Civil War’, Hodder & Stoughton 1998, London,
11. Payne, Stanley (1969). The Spanish Revolution. New York: W W Norton
12. Preston, Paul (2006). The Spanish Civil War London: Harper.
13. Preston, Paul (2012). The Spanish Holocaust: Inquisition and Extermination in
Twentieth-Century Spain, London, Harper Press,
16
14. Preston, Paul (1994). General Franco as a military leader. The transactions of
the Royal Historical Society: sixth series
16. Raguer, H (2007). Gunpowder and Incense: The Catholic Church and the
Spanish Civil War New York: Routledge.
17. Ribeiro de Menses (2001). Franco and the Spanish Civil War. London:
Routledge.
17
18