Prussian Strategic Concepts in the Years 1815–1819

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Prussian Strategic Concepts in the Years 1815–1819 Chapter 7 Prussian Strategic Concepts in the Years 1815–1819 During a Generalstabsreise between Königsberg and Insterburg (Wystruć, now Chernyakhovsk), one of the adjutants accompanying Alfred von Schlieffen exclaimed loudly his awe at the view of the Pregel (Pregoła, now Pregolya) val- ley in the light of the rising sun. Schlieffen’s response was brief and to the point: ‘An unimportant obstacle’.1 This story, usually used to illustrate Schlief- fen’s narrow range of interests, also shows the main problem with Prussian war planning throughout the whole 19th century, the appropriate appreciation of geographic conditions in potential areas of operation. The geostrategic position of the Kingdom of Prussia after the Congress of Vienna was considered unfavourable.2 In his momorandum of 1817, Boyen in- dicated that the country’s position was determined by two main factors. The situation had worsened since Frederickian times when Prussia had one power- ful neighbour, whereas now there were three. This forced Prussia to consider the possibility of fighting a war on two fronts (doppelte Krieg).3 This appraisal was shared by other officers, including Clausewitz4 who considered Prussia, as a result of the Congress of Vienna, to be compressed between two ‘colossuses’, France and Russia.5 Both were to be considered members of an anti-Prussian coalition, especially in the equivocal policies of Tsar Alexander. In consider- ation of the detachment of Prussian territories, Boyen felt that the political and financial significance of its eastern and western provinces meant that it was unthinkable to place the main line of defence on the Saale, as had been the case in 1806. It was difficult to depend on the political constellations in 1815 when Prussia was allied with the whole of Europe. In the event of war on two fronts, Prussia’s strategic triangle was Trier, Cosel, and Memel (Klaipėda). This triangle, on either side of the Elbe, whould constitute almost a hundred miles. Support would be provided by a strong reserve corps.6 In a memorandum of the same year, Boyen stated that Prussia’s situation should be considered in the context of each province’s relation to its neighbours. The aim was to hinder 1 J. Snyder, The Ideology of the Offensive. Military decision making the disasters of 1914 (Ithaca– London, 1984), 133–134. 2 Cf. Chapter 1. 3 ‘Boyens Darstellung’, 61, 68–69. 4 ‘Unsere Kriegsverfassung’, Clausewitz, Verstreute, 277–299. 5 Ibid., 299. 6 ‘Boyens Darstellung’, 69. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���� | doi:10.1163/9789004438439_009 <UN> Prussian Strategic Concepts in the Years 1815–1819 199 enemy movements, making full use of natural obstacles in the terrain, especially rivers, as well as the engagement of inhabitants.7 He considered France as the most dangerous neighbour, with its ability to mobilise 29 million citizens, and Russia, the border with whom needed to be defended.8 Taking stock of the situation, Boyen saw four main problems with the Prussian war system. First, territories on the left bank of the Weser and east of the Thuringian Forest did not constitute a cohesive defence system and were only partially protected territories of smaller states. This meant that an attack on them would have to come from German Confederation territory or be directed against a larger number of states belonging to the Confederation. This situation was un- favourable, for instead of a group of smaller states, Prussian territories on the Rhine bordered the powerful states of France9 and the Netherlands. To hold these territories required an independent army, which would have to operate in isolation for a long period of time. The situation required allies to increase security in the western provinces. Boyen believed Prussia’s military position with regard to Austria had not changed significantly. The only modification was that Austria had lost its possessions in the Netherlands and Breisgau, which meant that Britain no longer showed interest in its territories or detach- ments that were stationed there. The greatest changes were in the military sit- uation on the eastern border, where significant territorial alterations had oc- curred. The previous border along the Bug and Narew made a Russian attack from the south difficult, as its army would expose its back to an attack from Galicia. Moreover, a Russian offensive would need to cross the Vistula, Bzura, and Warthe. In the new circumstances, Galicia ceased to fulfil its role and the rivers no longer provided effective protection. The Prussian border had be- come open, and Berlin was only protected by the Oder line with fortresses in Küstrin and Glogau, and a resistance point in Wrocław provided that its defen- sive properties were restored. Boyen believed the situation necessitated the division of Prussian forces into two parts, supported by trained reserve units and fortresses.10 Prussian war preparations in the 1815–1819 period were per- ceived in parts concerning eastern and western provinces. In both instances, the issues concerned terrain and appropriate fortifications. 7 GStA pk, vi. ha, Boyen, No. 309, Nach welchen Grundsätzen, 3–4. 8 Ibid., 8. 9 Significantly, in the same period, the French also considered their borders to be unfavour- able. Particularly worrying for them was the loss of control of Luxembourg and fortresses on the Saar line, hindering defensive actions to the east of the Vosges mountains; Cox, The Halt in the Mud, 30–33. 10 Ibid., 9–13. <UN>.
Recommended publications
  • Walking in Kaliningrad the M
    THE BALTIC STATE UNIVERSITY NAMED AFTER IMMANUIL KANT. 15 LOCATION: THE CITY OF GARDENS 14 км Universitetskaya St., 2. The rst stone of the university There is a “green belt” around the city. It was made in the end of XIX-beginning of XX centuries was laid in August of 1844 during the fest of 300 years according to the project of landscape architector Ernst Snider at the place of defensive of birth of the Koenigsberg University. Royal architect buildings. This belt is one of sightseeing of the city. F.A. Shtuler made a great building in Italian Revival style. University as a sightseeing can be visited from 12 to 16 hours. The real building without any THE PARK OF CULTURE AND REST “YOUTH”. decoration is saved until nowadays. 1 LOCATION: Telman St., 3. The territory of the park is in the city district of Koenigsberg named Traghaime. It was THE MONUMENT TO IMMANUIL KANT. 16 called after the Prussian settlement in the district of LOCATION: the High Lake. In 1920-30s the park was in English Universitetskaya St., 2. The rst monument to I. Kant style. The new life was given to park with the was set near his house since 50 years after his death. presentation of a new project “The rebuilding of the The sculpture was made in 1857 in Berlin. In 1945 the Youth” in 2004. The park was reconstructed by the original monument disappeared. In 90s thanks to spring of 2008. There were made works in rehabilitation and planting of the territory. countess Denhoff there was made the copy of the There were made some bridges across the Golubaya River, were built cafes, covered monument by Harold Haake.
    [Show full text]
  • Report from the 2 GIS Meeting in Ryn, Poland
    Report from the 2nd GIS meeting in Ryn, Poland (act. 1.4) 1. General Data Poland Country: GWP Lithuania & GWP Poland Organizer: 5 November 2014, Ryn castle Date & Place: 2. Agenda Objective of the workshop: The main objective of the meeting was to discuss draft GIS maps for the Nemunas (Neman) and Pregolya river basins prepared by the GIS experts from Belarus, Lithuania, Kaliningrad Oblast (Russia) and Poland, information sources used for map compilation and their confidence level. Agenda Annex 1 in the attachment 3. Report (max 2000 characters) On 5th November, 2014 the 2nd workshop on “GIS mapping of water bodies in Lithuania, Poland, Belarus and Kaliningrad Oblast (Russia) for the management of transboundary Neman and Pregolya river basins” organized by GWP-Poland and GWP-Lithuania was held in Ryn, Poland. The meeting was organized back-to-back with the joint workshop of Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), GWP-Lithuania and GWP-Poland on “Project Development and Design Workshop - Indicative River Basin Management Plan, Program of measures and Investments for the South East Baltic Sea Region – Neman/Pregolya Basin Micro-Region”. The main goal of the GIS meeting was to discuss draft GIS maps on hydrology and human pressures for the Nemunas (Neman) and Pregolya compiled by GIS experts from Belarus, Lithuania, Kaliningrad Oblast (Russia) and Poland. Another important issue was to present and discuss information sources, their confidence level and other technical details of GIS mapping. Presentations on development of common databases and visualization of hydrological and human pressure information was also included into the agenda (see Annex 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Kaliningrad Architectural Landscape As a Tourist Attraction Kropinova, Elena G.; Kropinova, Kristina
    www.ssoar.info Kaliningrad architectural landscape as a tourist attraction Kropinova, Elena G.; Kropinova, Kristina Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Kropinova, E. G., & Kropinova, K. (2014). Kaliningrad architectural landscape as a tourist attraction. Baltic Region, 4, 79-92. https://doi.org/10.5922/2074-2079-8555-4-6 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Free Digital Peer Publishing Licence This document is made available under a Free Digital Peer zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den DiPP-Lizenzen Publishing Licence. For more Information see: finden Sie hier: http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ Diese Version ist zitierbar unter / This version is citable under: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51276-9 E. Kropinova, K. Kropinova KALININGRAD The authors consider the development ARCHITECTURAL of urban tourism as one of the factors be- LANDSCAPE hind the socioeconomic development of a AS A TOURIST territory. They give estimates for tourism ATTRACTION revenues associated with the emergence of a new attraction and its inclusion into trav- * E. Kropinova el itineraries and landmark maps. The au- ** K. Kropinova thors look at the experience of development of historical European towns from the per- spective of tourist attractiveness and ex- plore the role of architectural landscape in creating a positive image of a town for tourists; they also provide a background for including historical and cultural land- marks into a traveller’s experience. The authors analyse the results of the international urban development competi- tion for the best concept of the historical area of the centre of Kaliningrad Korolevskaya Gora and Its Surround- ings/The Heart of the City.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of New Trans-Border Water Routes in the South-East Baltic: Methodology and Practice Kropinova, Elena G.; Anokhin, Aleksey
    www.ssoar.info The development of new trans-border water routes in the South-East Baltic: methodology and practice Kropinova, Elena G.; Anokhin, Aleksey Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Kropinova, E. G., & Anokhin, A. (2014). The development of new trans-border water routes in the South-East Baltic: methodology and practice. Baltic Region, 3, 121-136. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2014-3-11 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Free Digital Peer Publishing Licence This document is made available under a Free Digital Peer zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den DiPP-Lizenzen Publishing Licence. For more Information see: finden Sie hier: http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ Diese Version ist zitierbar unter / This version is citable under: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51373-9 E. Kropinova, A. Anokhin This article offers an integrative ap- THE DEVELOPMENT proach to the development of trans-border water routes. Route development is analy- OF NEW TRANS-BORDER sed in the context of system approach as in- WATER ROUTES tegration of geographical, climatic, mea- ning-related, infrastructural, and market- IN THE SOUTH-EAST ing components. The authors analyse the Russian and European approaches to route BALTIC: METHODOLOGY development. The article focuses on the in- stitutional environment and tourist and rec- AND PRACTICE reational resources necessary for water route development. Special attention is paid to the activity aspect of tourist resour- * ces. At the same time, the development of Ö.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 FIFA WORLD CUP RUSSIA'n' WATERWAYS
    - The 2018 FIFA World Cup will be the 21st FIFA World Cup, a quadrennial international football tournament contested by the men's national teams of the member associations of FIFA. It is scheduled to take place in Russia from 14 June to 15 July 2018,[2] 2018 FIFA WORLD CUP RUSSIA’n’WATERWAYS after the country was awarded the hosting rights on 2 December 2010. This will be the rst World Cup held in Europe since 2006; all but one of the stadium venues are in European Russia, west of the Ural Mountains to keep travel time manageable. - The nal tournament will involve 32 national teams, which include 31 teams determined through qualifying competitions and Routes from the Five Seas 14 June - 15 July 2018 the automatically quali ed host team. A total of 64 matches will be played in 12 venues located in 11 cities. The nal will take place on 15 July in Moscow at the Luzhniki Stadium. - The general visa policy of Russia will not apply to the World Cup participants and fans, who will be able to visit Russia without a visa right before and during the competition regardless of their citizenship [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup]. IDWWS SECTION: Rybinsk – Moscow (433 km) Barents Sea WATERWAYS: Volga River, Rybinskoye, Ughlichskoye, Ivan’kovskoye Reservoirs, Moscow Electronic Navigation Charts for Russian Inland Waterways (RIWW) Canal, Ikshinskoye, Pestovskoye, Klyaz’minskoye Reservoirs, Moskva River 600 MOSCOW Luzhniki Arena Stadium (81.000), Spartak Arena Stadium (45.000) White Sea Finland Belomorsk [White Sea] Belomorsk – Petrozavodsk (402 km) Historic towns: Rybinsk, Ughlich, Kimry, Dubna, Dmitrov Baltic Sea Lock 13,2 White Sea – Baltic Canal, Onega Lake Small rivers: Medveditsa, Dubna, Yukhot’, Nerl’, Kimrka, 3 Helsinki 8 4,0 Shosha, Mologa, Sutka 400 402 Arkhangel’sk Towns: Seghezha, Medvezh’yegorsk, Povenets Lock 12,2 Vyborg Lakes: Vygozero, Segozero, Volozero (>60.000 lakes) 4 19 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 1 2 3 6 7 10 14 15 4,0 MOSCOW, Group stage 1/8 1/4 1/2 3 1 Estonia Petrozavodsk IDWWS SECTION: [Baltic Sea] St.
    [Show full text]
  • Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War Andrew Loren Jones East Tennessee State University
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 5-2014 Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War Andrew Loren Jones East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the European History Commons, and the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Jones, Andrew Loren, "Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War" (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2387. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/2387 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War ___________________________________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in History ________________________________________ by Andrew L. Jones May 2014 ________________________________________ Dr. Stephen G. Fritz, Chair Dr. Dinah Mayo-Bobee Dr. John M. Rankin Keywords: Nationalism, Delbrück, Schlieffen, German War Planning, Germany, Sedan, Moltke, War Enthusiasm, German Wars of Unification, World War I ABSTRACT Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War by Andrew L. Jones Debating Cannae: Delbrück, Schlieffen, and the Great War provides the reader a view of the historical struggle between Alfred von Schlieffen and Hans Delbrück. They argued fiercely about the foundation of the German Empire and the use of history.
    [Show full text]
  • (Or Seven) Bridges of Kaliningrad: a Personal Eulerian Walk, 2006
    MATCH MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 58 (2007) 529-556 Communications in Mathematical and in Computer Chemistry ISSN 0340 - 6253 The Six (or Seven) Bridges of Kaliningrad: a Personal Eulerian Walk, 2006 R. B. Mallion School of Physical Sciences, University of Kent, Canterbury, England, U.K. E-Mail Address: [email protected] (Received June 1, 2007) Abstract The eighteenth-century problem of the Bridges of Königsberg was solved in a memoir dated 1736 and written by the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler (1707í1783) soon after he had been appointed to the senior Chair of Mathematics at the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. Euler demonstrated that what is now called an Eulerian Walk (that is, a route that traverses all of the bridges once, and once only) was not possible in contemporary Königsberg. Soon after the Conferences of Yalta and Potsdam had assigned the city and its environs to the Soviet Union after World War II, Königsberg came to be known as the city of Kaliningrad (Ʉɚɥɢɧɢɧɝɪɚɞ), capital of the Kaliningrad Oblast, which, since the early 1990s, has found itself as an exclave of the present-day Russian Federation, isolated from mainland Russia by the newly independent republic of Lithuania (and, beyond that, Latvia and Belarus). Furthermore, the Kaliningrad Oblast’s only other adjoining neighbour is Poland which, like Lithuania, has been a Member of the European Union since 1 May 2004. This state of affairs thus determines that the Kaliningrad Oblast is, these days, doubly anomalous, in that it is not only an exclave of the Russian Federation but (simultaneously) it is also a foreign enclave within the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • What Else Did Euler Do?
    CHAPTER 3 WHAT ELSE DID EULER DO? Bridges THE PROBLEM On Sundays after church residents of the city of Königsberg in Prussia (Kaliningrad, Russia) in the 18th-century promenade around the city and greet friends as they cross paths. At that time, the city was set on both sides of the Pregel River (Pregolya River) and included two large islands which were connected to each other and the mainland by seven bridges. As the river flowed around Kneiphof, literally meaning pub yard and another island, it divided the city into four distinct regions. The seven bridges were called Blacksmith’s Bridge, Connecting Bridge, Green Bridge, Merchant’s Bridge, Wooden Bridge, High Bridge, and Honey Bridge.1 To amuse themselves, citizens attempted to find a way to take a walk around the city such that they would cross each bridge once and only once. A harmless amusement, but it would lead to a new branch of mathematical topology, which would have applications far beyond their imagination as they strolled around Königsberg. Over time, the town, bridges, and river have changed names, buildings have risen and been demolished, and the town’s found itself in different countries (Prussia, Germany, Russia); but the river’s always flowed just the same.2 Until the Second World War, seven bridges connected the landmasses separated by the River, shown here as they were in the 18th century.3 Figure 3.1. Euler’s drawing of Konigsberg Bridges in his 1736 paper, Solvtio Problematis Ad Geometriam Sitvs Pertinentis. Avctore 35 Chapter 3 Is it possible to take a walk around the town, starting at any point, crossing each of the seven bridges once and once only in any direction? We doubt that any hardy soul attempted all the possible promenades over the bridges – but if someone did so, it wouldn’t be of any special importance.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAINAGE BASIN of the BALTIC SEA Chapter 8
    216 DRAINAGE BASIN OF THE BALTIC SEA Chapter 8 BALTIC SEA 217 219 TORNE RIVER BASIN 221 KEMIJOKI RIVER BASIN 222 OULUJOKI RIVER BASIN 223 JÄNISJOKI RIVER BASIN 224 KITEENJOKI-TOHMAJOKI RIVER BASINS 224 HIITOLANJOKI RIVER BASIN 226 VUOKSI RIVER BASIN 228 LAKE PYHÄJÄRVI 230 LAKE SAIMAA 232 JUUSTILANJOKI RIVER BASIN 232 LAKE NUIJAMAANJÄRVI 233 RAKKOLANJOKI RIVER BASIN 235 URPALANJOKI RIVER BASIN 235 NARVA RIVER BASIN 237 NARVA RESERVOIR 237 LAKE PEIPSI 238 GAUJA/KOIVA RIVER BASIN 239 DAUGAVA RIVER BASIN 241 LAKE DRISVYATY/ DRUKSHIAI 242 LIELUPE RIVER BASIN 245 VENTA, BARTA/BARTUVA AND SVENTOJI RIVER BASINS 248 NEMAN RIVER BASIN 251 LAKE GALADUS 251 PREGEL RIVER BASIN 254 VISTULA RIVER BASIN 260 ODER RIVER BASIN Chapter 8 218 BALTIC SEA This chapter deals with major transboundary rivers discharging into the Baltic Sea and some of their transboundary tributaries. It also includes lakes located within the basin of the Baltic Sea. TRANSBOUNDARY WATERS IN THE BASIN OF THE BALTIC SEA1 Basin/sub-basin(s) Total area (km²) Recipient Riparian countries Lakes in the basin Torne 40,157 Baltic Sea FI, NO, SE Kemijoki 51,127 Baltic Sea FI, NO, RU Oulujoki 22,841 Baltic Sea FI, RU Jänisjoki 3,861 Lake Ladoga FI, RU Kiteenjoki-Tohmajoki 1,595 Lake Ladoga FI, RU Hiitolanjoki 1,415 Lake Ladoga FI, RU Lake Pyhäjärvi and Vuoksi 68,501 Lake Ladoga FI, RU Lake Saimaa Juustilanjoki 296 Baltic Sea FI, RU Lake Nuijamaanjärvi Rakkonlanjoki 215 Baltic Sea FI, RU Urpanlanjoki 557 Baltic Sea FI, RU Saimaa Canal including 174 Baltic Sea FI, RU Soskuanjoki Tervajoki 204
    [Show full text]
  • "We Germans Fear God, and Nothing Else in the World!" Military Policy in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914 Cavender Sutton East Tennessee State University
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 5-2019 "We Germans Fear God, and Nothing Else in the World!" Military Policy in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914 Cavender Sutton East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the European History Commons, and the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Sutton, Cavender, ""We Germans Fear God, and Nothing Else in the World!" Military Policy in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914" (2019). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 3571. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3571 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “We Germans Fear God, and Nothing Else in the World!”: Military Policy in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914 _________________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History _________________________ by Cavender Steven Sutton May 2019 _________________________ Stephen G. Fritz, Chair Henry J. Antkiewicz Brian J. Maxson Keywords: Imperial Germany, Military Policy, German Army, First World War ABSTRACT “We Germans Fear God, and Nothing Else in the World!”: Military Policy in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914 by Cavender Steven Sutton Throughout the Second Reich’s short life, military affairs were synonymous with those of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Clausewitz and the First World War* I
    The 2010 George C. Marshall Lecture in Military History Clausewitz and the First World War* I Hew Strachan Abstract English-language authors have blamed Clausewitz twice over for his part in the First World War. Liddell Hart attributed to him a doctrine of “absolute war,” embraced by European general staffs and emulated by the British. More recent scholars have seen the war as lacking a political rationale and so contradicting what is today the best-known of the nostrums of On War. But that was not the case before 1914, when Clausewitz’s text was interpreted in different but equally valid lights. This article analyses how On War was read by the principal belliger- ents both during the war and in its immediate aftermath. he British chief of the imperial general staff between 1941 and 1945, Alan Brooke, said of George C. Marshall that he was “a great gentleman and a great organizer,T but definitely not a strategist.”1 Brooke was not alone among British staff officers in holding that view, nor was it an opinion driven simply by differences over * This article is based on the George C. Marshall Lecture, delivered on 9 April 2010 at the Or- ganization of American Historians annual conference in Washington, D.C. The Marshall Lecture is co-sponsored by the Society for Military History and the George C. Marshall Foundation. 1. Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, War diaries 1939–1945, ed. Alex Danchev and Daniel Todman (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 2001), 249; see also Andrew Roberts, Masters and commanders: how four titans won the war in the west, 1941–1945 (London: Allen Lane, 2008), 33, 137, 427.
    [Show full text]
  • Transboundary Waters and Basins in the South-East Baltic
    TRANSBOUNDARY WATERS AND BASINS IN THE SOUTH-EAST BALTIC Ed. by Boris Chubarenko Russian Academy of Sciences P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology Atlantic Branch «Transboundary waters and basins in the South-East Baltic Edited by Dr. Boris Chubarenko Kaliningrad Terra Baltica 2008 УДК 912(084.4) ББК 226.173 T82 Preparation of this book was supported by Tacis Project “Seagull RC— Russian component of the development strategy for Euroregion Baltic”, No. 61.131/90 (2005–2006), and Seagull DevERB INTERREG project (2005–2006), Tacis Project “Sustainable Development Indicators for ICZM in the South-Eastern Baltic (SDI-4-SEB)”, 2006/131-758 (2007– 2008), the grant No. 08-05-01023 (2008) of the Russian Foundation for Basic Researches, plan-programm of the Laboratory for Coastal Systems Study of the Atlantic Branch of P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences PART-FINANCED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION The contents of this book are the sole responsibility of authors and can under no circumstances be regarded as refl ecting position of the European Union T82 Transboundary waters and basins in the South-East Baltic / ed. by B. Chubarenko. — Kaliningrad: Terra Baltica, 2008. — 306 p. ISBN 978-5-98777-031-3 This book is a collection of articles, presented information on coastal waters, lagoons and main river basins in the south-east part of the Baltic Sea, related to the Kaliningrad Oblast of the Russian Federation. The book is devoted to wide audience of environmental experts, students and readers interested in water issues. УДК 912(084.4) ББК 226.173 © Authors, 2008 © Atlantic Branch of P.P.
    [Show full text]