许多西方资产阶级学者认为,慕尼黑会议前夕在国防军将领中有一个“反对派”。他们与纳粹党及其领袖希特勒之间存在着很深的矛盾。他们坚决反对侵占捷克斯洛伐克,甚至制定了逮捕希特勒的计划。这种说法夸大了贝克、哈尔德等人与希特勒之间的矛盾,目的在于为国防军将领开脱罪行。另一方面,苏联的一些史学著作为了揭露绥靖政策的反动实质,也夸大过这些将领们与希特勒的矛盾。历史的真相究竟如何呢?笔者认为,德军将领与纳粹党领袖希特勒都是主张扩军备战,发动对外侵略的。但某些将领在战前对形势的估计与希特勒不同,他们担心过早地挑衅会引起英法的干涉,导致德国失败。这就是他们与希特勒的矛盾,但这显然不是根本性的矛盾,而只是策略上的分歧。由于英法的绥靖政策,希特勒的 Many Western bourgeois scholars believe that there was an “opposition” in the IDF generals on the eve of the Munich Conference. There is a deep contradiction between them and the Nazi party and its leader, Hitler. They firmly opposed the encroachment of Czechoslovakia and even laid down plans for the arrest of Hitler. This view exaggerates the contradictions between Baker, Hald and others and Hitler with the aim of absolving the IDF generals of their crimes. On the other hand, some Soviet Soviet historical books expose the reactionary nature of the appeasement policy and exaggerate the contradictions between these generals and Hitler. What exactly is the truth of history? In my opinion, both German generals and Hitler, leader of the Nazi party, are advocating arms expansion and preparing for war and invading foreign aggression. However, some generals estimated the situation before the war differently from Hitler. They fear that premature provocation will cause interference between Britain and France, leading to the failure of Germany. This is the contradiction between them and Hitler, but this is obviously not a fundamental contradiction, but only a strategic disagreement. Because of the appeasement policy of Britain and France, Hitler’s