The Struggle for Greece, 1941-1949 Hardcover – November 6, 2002

Well written. I wish it could have been printed in larger print.

good

This is perhaps the most comprehensive history of a chaotic decade in Greek history. It is densely written, packed with facts, events, conspiracies, and persons, but is not so cumbersome to overwhelm a general reader. This is an absorbing read. Woodhouse is a skillful writer and he achieves the near impossible — giving cogent narrative of chaotic events involving a seemingly infinite number of persons, groups, places and objects. You will be easily taken in by the skill and ease with which he lays out the narrative.

It is also written by the most qualified person to write this history. The author, C.M. Woodhouse, was a British operative (i.e., spy) who worked with the various resistance groups against the Nazi occupiers in the country, and thus had first hand experience of many of the facts in this history. Indeed, when he describes the purpose of actions undertaken by him or other operatives he unabashedly if matter-of-factly states in many places the purpose was to obtain “intelligence.”

Many resistance movements in Europe at the time had Communist or leftist leanings. Greece was no exception. One of the truly amazing aspects of this history is how well Woodhouse documented the narrative. His history is literally chock full of contemporary accounts, both from first-hand sources and especially from newspaper clippings. Woodhouse includes numerous newspaper stories, almost at a daily basis, culled from Greek newspapers. Many of these newspapers are still around. He especially focuses on clippings from Rizospastis, the organ of the Greek Communist Party, and other Greek newspapers documenting British atrocities. So many, in fact, that one had to wonder, Where on earth did he find these newspaper stories? The answer is obvious — From his own intelligence dossier!

So the general reader should be aware of the bias inherent in a history of this sort written by such a person. Bias can be demonstrated both in explicit statements and by omission of crucial facts. Both, to varying degrees, are present here.

As a staunch anti-Communist, Woodhouse describes most resistance leaders as “mediocre,” “weak,” or “unimaginative.” That bias is less noticeable in describing the events of what he calls, “The First Round.” This is the portion of the decade in which Greece experienced the German occupation. The interests of the Allies and the resistance fighters were then more or less aligned. Woodhouse, in fact, in keeping with his mission as a British operative (spy), participated in many of the same acts of resistance described in this phase. There were, however, two other phases. The “Second Round” consisted of the re-taking of Athens after the Germans left and the “Third Round” was the Greek Civil War where whatever conciliation existed among the various groups — ELAS, EAM, EDES, the British — broke down and all jostled for control of the country. The title of this book is very appropriate: They were all struggling for control. Woodhouse indeed was one of them.

Woodhouse’s Cold War mentality is demonstrated by his failure to distinguish between the two Greek Communistic factions. Communism was thought to be a huge, international monolithic movement, ready to take over the world. (In this respect this mentality is not unlike how many neo-Cons view radical, militant Islamic groups.) This mentality colors Woodhouse’s narrative of the activities of the KKE, the Greek Communist Party. Woodhouse discusses the KKE essentially discussed as a unitary party, answerable only to Moscow. In reality, there were two branches to the Greek Communist Party — one indeed answerable to Moscow (“Exoteriko”), the other a nationally based, independent, party, similar to the type of Communism practiced by Tito in the then-country of Yugoslavia (“Esoteriko”). The closest Woodhouse goes to acknowledging the two groups is by stating late in the book that the KKE was “confused,” “not united,” but “divided.” This, however, could be said of any left-leaning resistance group in Greece at the time. Woodhouse does not distinguish between the two. The split occurred perhaps later; Woodhouse however does not say. At any rate, while it does not detract from the quality of Woodhouse’s narrative, it presents an incomplete picture of the political forces in the struggle.

This is very much a history written by the victor. This can be most clearly seen in his treatment of the Varkiza Agreement. This was the accord worked out between the British overlords, Greek politicians, notably George Papandreou, and the resistance groups, which notoriously provided for the demobilization of the latter. Woodhouse noted how the Resistance fighters repeatedly violated the agreement. What he does not reflect are the violations by the ruling powers (the British) nor the common Greek perception — held to this day — of elder Papandreou being the “Papatzis,” or trickster, who tricked the Resistance to disarm only to renege later.

To his credit Woodhouse discounts the notion that the Greek Civil War was inspired or commandeered by Soviet Russia. Stalin literally didn’t care about Greece. Woodhouse correctly implies that the Civil War was the result of a total breakdown in reconciliation of the diverse groups existing at that time. However, true to his Cold Warrior leanings Woodhouse identifies KKE as the “catalyst” of the outbreak of hostilities, having allowed the country to fall into political chaos. What Woodhouse does not appreciate is the political damage caused by the endless indecision of the imperial powers (Britain and USA) on whether to install the monarchy again. The Civil War was as much caused by Britain and later the USA pushing their agenda rather than allowing the Greeks to duke it out. This, however, Britain and the US would never have allowed, because Leftists controlled three fifths of the country and they couldn’t just let the country “go Red.”

Stalin may not have cared what happened in Greece at that time, but as Woodhouse correctly observes, we all should care enough to understand that decade. Greece in the 40s was very much a litmus test. What was happening in Greece during and immediately after the war happened elsewhere in Southern Europe. This is as much a history of Post-WWII Greece as it is for the entire Balkans, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Albania, and Macedonia. The Civil War which followed moreover was the first great conflict in the Cold War and set the tone for East West relations for the next forty five years. The Greek Civil War set the stage for Korea, Vietnam, and other Cold War quagmires.

Even in this post-Cold War world, this decade in this little country in Southern Europe can still offer lessons. It is ironic that today Germany would figure so prominently again in the internal affairs of Greece. Even Woodhouse could not have predicted that. Woodlouse’s history is more relevant than ever, absolutely engrossing, a real page-turner, and a marvelous read.

Very intereseted book for someone who likes to read and lern the real story.I like Amazon because most of the times I fount what I want.

This book tells almost nothing about Axis occupation of Greece 1941-1944. There's no description at all of occupation regimes and domestic collaboration with Axis powers, little about the life in Greece during the occupation, while the military situation in Greece and battles fought there between the occupation powers and the resistance are also not duly dealt with.
After the WW II, there's insufficient attention given to political and social developments in Greece other than those related to the Communist insurgency. Elections and the referendum on republic vs. monarchy in 1946 are barely mentioned, with no results presented. On the other hand, the autor delved too deep into details in describing some battles.
On the positive side, this book is good in describing activities of the Greek Communist party, the role of foreign factors in Greece affairs and the civil war 1946-1946, its military aspect, in particular.

This is a "must" book for anyone seriously interested in the events in Greece during and after WW-II. The author was part (and eventually the head) of the British mission with the Greek guerillas so he was an intimate observer of what was happening. I lived in Greece during these awful years and in spite of my young age (I was 15 at the end of the period described in the book) I have a lot of recollections (when people shoot at each other in the streets in your town you take an early interest in politics). I found the book quite impartial and comprehensive. (I am sure that parts of it will infuriate the right and other parts will infuriate the left.) The author correctly points out that the Greek civil war was primarily an internal affair and external influences (by the communist countries in favor of the left and the US and Britain in favor of the right) were not as big as each side claim about the other. His closing statement is that (to the Soviets) "The rank and file of the KKE, and in particular its leaders, were expendable. Without a trace of compunction, Stalin let them go to their doom." Elsewhere (p. 233) he points out (correctly in my opinion) that "The rebels failed because the mass of the Greek people was against them." The internal nature of the conflict (with outsiders providing material support but not manpower except in one brief phase) is a fact that was forgotten when the Greek civil war was used as a paradigm to justify the US participation in the war in Vietnam.

The book describes at length the inconsistent behavior of the communist leadership but it does not mention what, in my opinion, was the main reason for that behavior. During the German occupation many people joined the communist led resistance to fight the Germans. Many of them were also not happy with the Greek government that was in power before WW-II. The communist leadership mistaken thought that these people would also be in favor of a socialist state. As the communist leadership pressed harder more and more people turned against it. Therefore the large support they had during WW-II eventually evaporated. The true attitudes of the Greek people are described very well in the book "Eleni" by Nicholas Gage. Readers who are not familiar with modern Greek history may also find "Eleni" easier to read. Personally I believe the two books complement each other very well.