Battle on the Home Front

 

Following the Second World War millions of soldiers rushed home in the hopes that their lives would be better following years of fighting and loss on the battlefield. Soldiers returning home to Leningrad in the Soviet Union were greeted with “fanfares, bunting and celebration” but this was  merely an instrument of propaganda created by the government in order to illustrate to civilians how “to treat veterans with respect and surround them with care”(Dale,114 ). Unfortunately, these patriotic and enthusiastic welcoming’s were not the lasting reality for the young Soviet soldiers who were returning home after the demoralizing Second World War. In the article “Rats and Resentment: The Demobilization of the Red Army in Postwar Leningrad” by Robert Dale, veterans returning to their homes in Leningrad received little to no assistance from the Soviet government. Many had no place to live and wounded veterans often did not receive the  proper medical equipment, such as artificial limbs, that they needed in order to continue  with their lives. It was deplorable to read that so many young men were forced to pay bribes in order to rent an apartment for them and their families. In some cases they were forced to move into hostels with their young families (Dale, 128). These men risked their lives for their country and received little in return. It illustrates how unstable and backwards the Soviet’s Communist government was. The state was not providing for their citizens like they promised their system of government would but instead they were fostering the ideals of corruption that would later characterize the Soviet Union. In contrast Crotty and Edele’s article “Total War and Entitlement: Towards a Global History of Veteran Privilege” illustrates veterans returning to Australia following the Second World War were treated as a superior citizens than those who did not fight. These veterans expected their government to aid them through entitlement programs which included higher living wages. The article also addresses what life was like to for Soviets returning home. It states that many received entitlement from the state if they were classified as “poor” and would receive a pension from the government. However, the Soviet government merely did this to stop civil unrest and “once potential military opposition to Stalin’s rule had been dealt with…benefits were cut drastically”  (Crotty and Edele, 29). It is interesting to compare the two sources because Crotty and Edele see that though the Soviets did not provide those returning from War with very much it was still some form of entitlement. This contradicts Dale’s viewpoint. He believes that  the harsh life faced by returning Soviets are often over looked and it is generalized that they soldiers were quickly able to assimilate back into their home country (Dale, 113). I was surprised to see similarities between what soldiers returning to Leningrad and Displaced Persons faced. Both soldiers and DPs lived in a world that they no longer recognized. When soldiers returned to Leningrad it was no longer the city they once knew. Instead it was inhabited by “thousands of rural migrants”(Dale, 121). The DPs were faced with the same challenge when they had to begin lives in new countries vastly different than their own . Both groups received little help following the war that devastated Europe but also impacted and in some cases ruined their lives. These articles give insight into how Veterans were treated once they were home. Some had happy returns where they received benefits and a warm welcome. While others were forced to try and figure out how to rebuild the lives they once had.   Sources: Crotty, Martin and Edele, Mark. “Total War and Entitlement: Towards a History of Veteran Privilege”. Australian Journal of Politics and History (2013): (15-32) Dale, Robert. “Rats and Resentment: The Demobilization of the Red Army in Postwar Leningrad, 1945-50.” Journal of Contemporary History Vol. 45 (2010): 113-133.