History of foreign policy of the USSR. History of foreign policy of the ussr volume one
The victory of the USSR over fascism led to an increase in the sympathy of the Western public for the Soviet Union. It became the most powerful country in Europe. It is no coincidence that during the war and after its end, the number of communists in European countries almost tripled. Most countries of Eastern and Central Europe found themselves in the sphere of influence of the USSR. Within a few years they became socialist states. But socialism came not only to Europe. In 1948, a pro-Soviet regime was established in North Korea. In 1949, the Chinese Civil War ended with a Communist victory. Socialist countries became satellites of the USSR, which largely determined their domestic and foreign policies. The growing influence of the USSR and the spread of communist ideas have been a concern for Western leaders since the early post-war days. In 1946, British Prime Minister Churchill gave a speech in Fulton in which he called for opposition to the Soviet desire for “the limitless spread of its power and its doctrines.” In fact, this was a declaration of the Cold War.
In 1947, US President Truman proposed a program of measures to “save Europe from Soviet expansion.” This program is better known as the Truman Doctrine. The purpose of the doctrine is to stop the further expansion of the sphere of influence of the USSR and communist ideology, to force the Soviet Union to withdraw to its former borders. The main objectives of this doctrine:
- - providing large-scale economic assistance to European countries;
- - creation of a military-political union of Western states;
- - support for the opposition in Eastern European countries;
- - placement of US military bases near the borders of the USSR and, if necessary, the use of force against the USSR and its allies.
In 1949, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) was created, which became the basis for cooperation and economic integration of the socialist countries of Europe. In 1949-1952, in the socialist countries, under the influence of the USSR, a purge of leadership cadres took place, and new leaders loyal to Stalin came to power. Meanwhile, the confrontation between the USSR and the West was gaining strength.
In April 1949, NATO was created - a military-political organization of Western Europe and the United States. That same year, the Soviet Union conducted its first test of its atomic bomb. In May 1949, the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) was formed in the western occupation zone of Germany. After this, in October of the same year, the socialist state of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) appeared in the Soviet occupation zone. The two Germanys have become a kind of symbol of the confrontation between two political systems. And the famous Berlin Wall, built later, was the embodiment of the “Iron Curtain” that separated these systems. The first clash of forces occurred in the early 50s during the Korean War. American troops took part in it with the consent of the UN. The USSR, China, and other socialist countries provided assistance to the DPRK. Thanks to the USSR, North Korea avoided the American atomic bombing, and the war ended in failure for the United States. In 1953, an armistice agreement was signed. After Stalin's death, in 1955, a military-political bloc of socialist countries was created - the Warsaw Pact Organization. Former allies have become enemies. The Cold War began.
The period that began after the 20th Congress of the CPSU until the early 1960s was called the “Thaw” (based on the story of the same name by I. G. Ehrenburg). According to I.G. Ehrenburg, the “thaw” replaced the bitter frosts of the post-war period. The new leadership gradually strengthened the point of view of Khrushchev, Mikoyan and some other leaders, according to which confrontation between the blocs was not inevitable. The possibility of peaceful coexistence of the two systems was recognized. The search begins for new approaches to solving complex international problems that have accumulated over the first post-war decade. Among the most important tasks of Soviet diplomacy in the international arena: reducing the military threat, ending the Cold War, expanding international relations and strengthening the influence of the USSR in the world as a whole.
Already in the summer of 1954, Khrushchev, despite opposition from Molotov, began preparing a rapprochement with Yugoslavia. From May 26 to June 3, 1955, the Soviet delegation consisting of Khrushchev, Bulganin and Mikoyan was in Belgrade and conducted intense negotiations on the normalization of relations. Ultimately, on June 2, a joint Soviet-Yugoslav statement was made, acknowledging that issues of the internal life of a state fell exclusively within the competence of its government. One of Khrushchev’s first attempts to establish contacts with the great capitalist powers was the Geneva meeting of the leaders of the four powers, held in July 1955. The Moscow delegation tried to return to the discussion of the German question, having already agreed to recognize the status quo in Germany, that is, the actual existence of two German states.
The Soviet side presented a plan to ensure collective security in Europe. It consisted of two parts. The first provided for the conclusion of a multilateral agreement with the participation of the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany. Countries party to the treaty were required to commit themselves to renouncing the use of force in resolving international disputes. The second part of the Soviet project outlined in the future, after the signing of a pan-European treaty, the formation of a system of guarantee obligations to ensure military-political security for all European countries.
As such a system was formed, it was planned to dissolve the military blocs existing in Europe. Moscow's proposals were not accepted. The American delegation saw the prospect of solving the German problem differently. Washington proposed holding free elections in both parts of Germany, knowing after the events of 1953 in the GDR about the dissatisfaction of the East German population with communist rule. Then, as the American side reasoned, taking into account the election results, the Germans themselves will decide whether to remain in NATO or the Warsaw Pact.
Then it will be possible to conclude a general agreement on collective security in Europe with the participation of such Germany as it will be after the elections. This scheme was supported by France and Britain, but it turned out to be unacceptable to the USSR. It was not possible to achieve any significant results on issues in Europe during the negotiations. The solution to the situation in Indochina was a success. France withdrew its troops and recognized the independence of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. On May 15, 1955, the USSR, USA, Great Britain and France signed an agreement on the restoration of an independent and democratic Austria, whose parliament decided on permanent neutrality. The isolation that existed around the Soviet Union has been broken. Great Britain invited the leadership of the USSR to visit the country. The trip of Khrushchev and Bulganin to the British Isles and their negotiations with members of the British government in April 1956 also did not bring anything new to the positions of the parties. During the meetings and conversations, only different points of view were clarified.
After the visit of Chancellor K. Adenauer to Moscow in September 1955, diplomatic relations with Germany were established. In October 1956, as a result of negotiations, relations with Japan were normalized. The USSR abandoned reparation claims and supported Japan's request to join the UN. However, a peace treaty was never signed due to territorial disputes. By the end of the 1950s, the Soviet Union had trade and diplomatic relations with more than 70 countries. In 1954-1964. Soviet leaders visited dozens of capitals in Europe, Asia and America. Prominent politicians and entrepreneurs from the USA, England, France, Italy and many other countries of the world visited Moscow. At this time, the Soviet Union proposed a new form of foreign policy activity - public diplomacy (a set of measures aimed at studying and informing foreign audiences, as well as establishing contacts.).
The influence of the USSR grew after its accession in 1954 to UNESCO - the educational, scientific and cultural organization of the UN - and to the International Labor Organization (ILO). In 1958, the Soviet Union renewed its membership in the World Health Organization (WHO). XX Congress of the CPSU in February 1956. It formulated a new foreign policy doctrine of the Soviet state - a return to the policy of peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems, the possibility of preventing wars in the modern era, and recognized various forms of countries' transition to socialism. The proclaimed course was quite contradictory. On the one hand, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries was declared, and on the other hand, the need to provide assistance to both the countries of the socialist camp and the world communist and national liberation movement was emphasized, i.e. in fact, it was about interference in the internal affairs of capitalist and developing countries.
Khrushchev proposed creating a system of collective security in Europe and then in Asia, as well as proceeding with immediate disarmament. The Soviet government decided to unilaterally reduce the Armed Forces. In 1958, the Soviet government unilaterally declared a moratorium on nuclear testing and appealed to the parliaments of all countries to support this initiative. However, breaking the vicious circle of the arms race in the 50s. It didn't work out that way. However, the Soviet leadership was not sincere in its desire for peace. It would be more correct to think that it was trying to gain time in the arms race. Peace initiatives were put forward against the background of significant successes of Soviet scientists in improving weapons and missile technology. In August 1957, the USSR successfully tested the world's first intercontinental ballistic missile. For the first time, US territory was potentially vulnerable to a nuclear missile strike.
The Hungarian crisis in September - October 1956. The new government led by Imre Nagy tried to get out of strict dependence on Moscow, break off allied relations with the USSR and other people's democracies, and achieve entry into NATO. The apogee of the Hungarian “October Revolution” was the events of October 23, 1956, when armed students and workers gathered at a rally in Budapest destroyed the monument to Stalin. In response to these actions, the Soviet leadership decided on military intervention in the internal affairs of Hungary (based on the formal appeal of the “provisional workers’ and peasants’ government” of J. Kadar). On the night of November 4, Budapest was occupied by Soviet troops. The popular uprising was suppressed.
The second half of the 1950s deteriorated relations with the PRC. Since 1957, the Chinese leadership began to express sharp criticism of the Soviet model of building socialism and the campaign launched in the USSR to expose the cult of personality. Mao Zedong openly began to claim the role of second leader in the socialist world and the world communist movement. China no longer wanted to accept the role of the “little brother” in the family of socialist nations. Accusing the Soviet leadership of departing from the principles of Marxism-Leninism and of revisionism, Beijing sharply advocated curtailing relations with the USSR: In 1960, China laid claims to a number of border territories of the USSR and Mongolia. Since 1962, armed conflicts began on the Soviet-Chinese border.
Romania also took a special position within the socialist camp, which in 1958 achieved the withdrawal of Soviet troops from its territory. Relations with Albania, which withdrew from the Department of Internal Affairs, were severed. The leaders of North Korea also focused heavily on China. Thus, during the years of the “thaw”, the unity of the socialist countries began to be violated.
The settlement of the German question, which now consisted of determining the status of West Berlin. According to the decisions of the Potsdam Peace Conference in 1945, the capital of Germany, like the entire territory of the country, was divided into occupation zones. The Soviet zone became the GDR in 1949, and Berlin became the capital of socialist Germany. The territory of West Berlin was actually part of the Federal Republic of Germany. In November 1958, the Soviet government turned to Western countries with a request to review the status of West Berlin, which was to become a free and demilitarized city. The goal was the elimination of “an outpost of imperialism on socialist German soil.” A fundamental decision on the issue of the status of West Berlin was postponed (in accordance with the agreements between Khrushchev and Eisenhower) until May 1960, when a conference of the heads of government of the USSR, USA, France and England was to take place. But the meeting never took place: on May 1, 1960, an American U-2 reconnaissance plane was shot down over Soviet territory (pilot F. Powers was detained at the landing site and gave testimony exposing him as a spy). East-West relations have sharply deteriorated. The western sector of the city quickly recovered with the help of investment from the United States (Marshall Plan).
The standard of living here was incomparably higher than in the eastern sector. A significant part of the population, mainly young people and students in large cities of the GDR, openly advocated a change in the political system. In this regard, after preliminary agreement with Moscow, on the initiative of the leader of the GDR, W. Ulbricht, a wall of concrete and barbed wire was erected around West Berlin on the night of August 13, 1961. This measure made it possible to prevent “voting with one’s feet” against the socialist system. The Berlin crisis had a negative impact on the development of international relations in Europe.
October 1962 The Cuban Missile Crisis broke out. Causes:
According to the official Soviet version, the crisis was caused by the deployment in 1961 by the United States in Turkey (a NATO member country) of medium-range Jupiter missiles, which could reach cities in the western part of the Soviet Union, including Moscow and the main industrial centers of the USSR. In response to these actions, in the immediate vicinity of the US coast, on the island of Cuba, the Soviet Union stationed professional military units and units armed with both conventional and nuclear weapons, including ground-based ballistic and tactical missiles. Soviet naval submarines equipped with missiles and torpedoes with nuclear warheads were also stationed on combat duty off the coast of Cuba. The United States, trying to overthrow the Castro regime, organized a landing in the Playa Giron area in April 1961. To protect against American expansion, F. Castro in the spring of 1962 obtained from the Soviet Union the deployment of medium-range missiles with nuclear warheads in Cuba. Since Cuba declared itself a socialist country, Khrushchev considered it his duty to protect the “island of freedom.” (Initially, after the victory of the revolution in Cuba in 1959, its leader Fidel Castro did not have close relations with the Soviet Union.
During his fight against the regime of Fulgencio Batista in the 1950s, Castro several times appealed to Moscow for military assistance, but was refused. Moscow was skeptical about the leader of the Cuban revolutionaries and the very prospects for revolution in Cuba, believing that the US influence there was too great. Fidel made his first foreign visit after the victory of the revolution to the United States, but President Eisenhower refused to meet with him, citing being busy. After this demonstration of an arrogant attitude towards Cuba, Castro took measures against American dominance.) The opportunity to place a military base in close proximity to the United States was also tempting.
Since the spring of 1962, the USSR began secretly transferring missiles. By June 1962, the General Staff developed a cover operation codenamed "Anadyr". The operation was planned and led by Marshal of the Soviet Union I.Kh. Bagramyan. According to the drafters of the plan, this was supposed to mislead the Americans regarding the destination of the goods. All Soviet military personnel, technical personnel and others accompanying the “cargo” were also told that they were heading to Chukotka. For greater authenticity, whole carriages of fur coats and sheepskin coats arrived at the ports. But, despite such a large-scale cover, the operation had one significant flaw: it was impossible to hide the missiles from American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft that regularly flew over Cuba. Thus, the plan was developed in advance taking into account the fact that the Americans would discover the Soviet missiles before they were all installed. The only way out that the military was able to find was to place several anti-aircraft batteries in Cuba at the unloading sites. In October 1962, this became known to the Americans. Options for further action are immediate invasion. In preparation for the invasion, the transfer of troops to Florida began. The military rushed the president to order the invasion because they feared that by the time the USSR installed all the missiles, it would be too late. The invasion could have resulted in a nuclear strike on the American landing force, with catastrophic consequences. One way or another, the idea of invasion was criticized by the president.
Then President D. Kennedy declared a naval blockade of Cuba and demanded the immediate removal of Soviet missiles from the island. Khrushchev called quarantine “an act of aggression pushing humanity into the abyss of a world nuclear missile war.” In the letter, the First Secretary warned Kennedy that "the captains of Soviet ships will not comply with the instructions of the American Navy," and that "if the United States does not stop its piracy activities, the government of the USSR will take any measures to ensure the safety of ships." Not only the US and USSR troops, but also NATO and the Internal Affairs Directorate were put on full combat readiness.
(It was 5 o’clock in the evening in Moscow, when a tropical storm was raging in Cuba. One of the air defense units received a message that an American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft had been spotted approaching Guantanamo Bay. The chief of staff of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile division, Captain Antonets, called the headquarters Pliev for instructions, but he was not there. The deputy commander of the GSVK for combat training, Major General Leonid Garbuz, ordered the captain to wait for Pliev to appear. A few minutes later, Antonets called headquarters again - no one answered the phone. When the U-2 was already over Kuba, Garbuz himself ran to the headquarters and, without waiting for Pliev, gave the order to destroy the plane. According to other sources, the order to destroy the reconnaissance aircraft could have been given by Pliev’s deputy for air defense, aviation lieutenant general Stepan Grechko, or the commander of the 27th air defense division, Colonel Georgy Voronkov.The U-2 pilot, Major Rudolf Anderson, was killed. Around the same time, another U-2 was almost intercepted over Siberia, as General Le May, the Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, ignored the order of the US President to cease all flights over Soviet territory. A few hours later, two US Navy photographic reconnaissance aircraft were fired upon by anti-aircraft guns while flying over Cuba at low altitude. One of them was damaged, but the pair returned safely to base. Kennedy's military advisers tried to convince the President to order an invasion of Cuba before Monday, "before it's too late." Kennedy did not give up hope for a peaceful resolution. It is generally accepted that “Black Saturday” October 27, 1962 is the day when the world was closest to a global nuclear war).
The political ambitions of the leaders brought the world to the brink of a nuclear disaster. But still, a saving compromise was found. During intensive negotiations via direct wire between N.S. Khrushchev and D. Kennedy, the parties agreed that the USSR would remove missiles from Cuba, and the USA - from Turkey and Italy. In addition, Kennedy guaranteed the security of the Castro regime. With the resolution of the Caribbean crisis, a new effective form of interstate relations emerged - personal contacts between heads of state. They made it possible to achieve some easing of international tension. However, the assassination of D. Kennedy in November 1963 and the resignation of N.S. Khrushchev stopped this process in October 1964. A new round of the arms race began in the mid-1960s.
The emotions experienced during the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis clearly showed the world the need for a treaty on the limitation of nuclear weapons. In 1963, an agreement was signed in Moscow between the USSR, the USA, and England banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water. Soon more than a hundred states joined this treaty. The USSR continued its policy of expanding its sphere of influence, supporting the enemies of the United States (“Cold War”). However, the imposition of socialist orders on many countries in Asia and Africa interfered with foreign policy, because these orders led to a deterioration in the economy and caused discontent among the population.
In 1968, the USSR, under pressure from the leaders of the socialist countries, sent troops into Czechoslovakia, whose authorities began to carry out liberal reforms that objectively contributed to the curtailment of socialism. The deployment of troops caused sharp discontent in the West. In 1969, border conflicts between the USSR and China occurred. In 1965-1975 The USSR supported North Vietnam in the fight against the regime of South Vietnam and the United States. The victory of North Vietnam was also a victory for the USSR. In 1967, the USSR took the side of the Arab countries in their unsuccessful war against Israel, which was backed by the United States. He later supported the Palestine Liberation Organization against Israel.
At the end of the 60s. a new detente began in relations with the West. In 1972, US President R. Nixon came to Moscow. In 1971, the USSR signed a cooperation agreement with France, in 1972 - a peace treaty with Germany and the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT-1), in 1975 - the Final Act of the meeting in Helsinki, which declared the post-war borders in Europe unshakable; The USSR promised to comply with the UN Declaration of Human Rights. As a sign of the emerging detente, a Soviet-American crew flew into space in 1975 (Soyuz-Apollo program). In 1979, the SALT II Treaty was signed. In 1979, the USSR sent troops into Afghanistan to support its proxies, after which the West accused the USSR of aggression. The SALT II Treaty was not ratified. The detente is over. In 1980, many Western teams did not come to the Olympics in Moscow, in 1984. Soviet athletes - to the Olympics in Los Angeles.
With the beginning of the perestroika process, serious changes began to occur in the foreign policy of the USSR. With the resignation from the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs A.A. Gromyko, there was a change in the leadership of the ministry. People with new thinking came to foreign policy. Foreign policy began to be chosen on the basis of expert opinion. Gorbachev declared the priority of universal values over class ones and the rejection of the main postulate of Soviet ideology, and the split of the world into two opposing socio-political systems. The world was recognized as one and indivisible. The main instrument for resolving international issues was not the balance of forces, but the balance of their interests. Based on this, the main directions of foreign policy were determined:
easing the confrontation between East and West through negotiations;
resolution of regional conflicts;
expansion of economic ties with the world community.
Particular importance was attached to Soviet-American relations. “Summit meetings” became annual, and as a result, agreements were signed on the destruction of medium- and shorter-range missiles. In July 1991, M.S. Gorbachev and D. Bush signed an agreement on the limitation of offensive weapons. Significant success has been achieved in the negotiation process on reducing the number of weapons in Europe. Having signed this agreement in November 1990, the USSR put forward a counter initiative and unilaterally reduced the number of troops by 500 thousand people.
In April 1991, M.S. Gorbachev paid a visit to Japan in order to prepare the ground for the signing of a peace treaty and revitalization of bilateral relations. The Soviet delegation officially acknowledged the existence of territorial disagreements with Japan related to changes in borders as a result of their revision in 1945. In May 1989, as a result of the visit of the Soviet delegation to Beijing, relations with China were normalized and long-term agreements on political, economic and cultural cooperation were signed. The Soviet Union's senseless war in Afghanistan was put to an end. The process of settlement and withdrawal of troops was carried out in stages: in February 1988, the withdrawal of troops was announced, which began on May 15, 1988 and ended in February 1989.
The policy of non-use of force in international relations, including in relation to allies, accelerated the process of the fall of communist regimes in Eastern European countries. In Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, and the GDR, new democratic forces came to power. In November 1989, the Berlin Wall, a symbol of the division of Europe, ceased to exist. The leaders of the new states set a course for breaking ties with the USSR and rapprochement with Western countries.
On July 1, 1991, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact was legally formalized. By this time, Soviet troops had left Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The biggest problem in European politics, the “German question,” was solved. In 1990, a meeting between German Chancellor He. Kohl and M.S. took place in Moscow. Gorbachev. During the negotiations, an agreement was reached on the unification of the two German states and the entry of a united Germany into NATO. In March of the same year, multi-party elections were held in the GDR, which were won by a bloc of bourgeois-conservative parties. In November, the GDR became part of the Federal Republic of Germany.
During the period of perestroika, the USSR was integrated into the world community. The work of USSR representatives in international conferences and meetings of leaders of leading countries began. In the West, the sharp turn in foreign policy was associated with the name of USSR President Gorbachev. In 1990 he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Trust in the USSR increased.
The revision of the foreign policy course in the USSR began after the death of Stalin. In the 50s Malenkov began to talk about “détente” in international relations. Let us further consider the distinctive features of the foreign policy of the USSR in 1953-1964.
Peace treaties
The foreign policy of the USSR in 1953-1964 was focused primarily on establishing peaceful, mutually beneficial interaction with foreign countries. At the initiative of the Soviet leadership, many agreements were signed. So, in 1953, on July 27, an armistice agreement was concluded in Korea. The country's leadership saw the expansion of areas of cooperation with other states as the main means of easing tension on the world stage. In 1955, on January 25, the Presidium of the Supreme Council adopted a Decree ending the state of war with Germany. In September of the same year, the head of the German government arrived in Moscow. During the visit, diplomatic relations with West Germany were established. In 1955, in mid-May, an agreement was signed with Austria. In accordance with it, the state of war was also terminated. The document established and guaranteed neutrality.
In 1956, the USSR returned the leased territory of Finland - Porkkala-Udd, where the Union naval base was located. In mid-June, the Karelo-Finnish Union Republic was transformed into an autonomous one. Also in 1956, on October 19, Japan and the USSR adopted a declaration on the restoration of diplomatic relations and the end of the state of war. By the end of the 50s, the Soviet Union was bound by trade contracts with more than 70 states.
Foreign policy of the USSR 1953-1964 (briefly)
Key directions were identified at Khrushchev announced at the meeting that the next world war was not inevitable, pointing to the possibilities of different paths of transition to a socialist system and peaceful neighborhood of countries with different political systems. The documents of the congress especially emphasized the Soviet Union's loyalty to the principles of independence and sovereignty in interaction with foreign countries. At the same time, Khrushchev argued that the coexistence of states in the world acts as a specific type of class struggle. It excludes only military methods and does not extend to ideology. In 1957, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was headed by the prominent diplomat Gromyko. The foreign policy department was under his leadership until 1985. Gromyko made a great contribution to the development of the negotiation process on the issue of establishing control over the arms race.
Changes in military doctrine
In 1956, a certain inconsistency in the foreign policy of the USSR of 1953-1964 became evident. A number of foreign countries formed blocs whose activities were aimed, among other things, at containing the influence of the states of the socialist camp and the formation of the national liberation movement of colonial peoples.
Foreign policy in the USSR in 1953-1964. Thus, it showed the determination of the leadership to preserve the model of socialism in the states of South-Eastern and Central Europe.
History of Russia of the XX - early XXI centuries Tereshchenko Yuri Yakovlevich
1. Foreign policy of the USSR
1. Foreign policy of the USSR
"Cold War". The post-war 8-year development of the USSR proceeded in anticipation of the third world war. Its threat was defined by W. Churchill's Fulton speech. On March 5, 1946, the retired Prime Minister of Great Britain, on his own behalf, delivered a report at Westminster College in Fulton (Missouri, USA) that he called “The Muscles of the World.” By “muscles,” Churchill meant American atomic weapons, which proved their terrible destructive power during the atomic bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively. Churchill was the first world politician to warn that for humanity these weapons could become suicidal . “The Middle Ages, even the Stone Age, can fly to us on the brilliant wings of science,” he figuratively put it, “and what could shed a golden shower of prosperity on humanity will become an instrument of its complete destruction.”
However, Churchill devoted most of his report not to justifying the need to ban weapons of mass destruction, but to proving the need for their effective political use. This was caused by the extreme concern of the Western powers about the growing influence of the USSR in the post-war world.
Recognizing that military victories put the USSR among the “leading nations of the world,” the former British prime minister accused it of striving for “the limitless spread of its power and its doctrines.” This posed, in his opinion, a danger to “the great principles of freedom and human rights ... of the Anglo-Saxon world.” Since "Russians admire nothing more than strength," the US and UK, by creating an "association of English-speaking nations," should speak to them from a position of strength to curb Russia's "expansionist tendencies" in Europe and Asia. Churchill proposed using American atomic weapons as an effective means of intimidating the Soviet government.
The special significance of the speech lay in the fact that it was delivered not in a narrow circle of like-minded people, but publicly and in the presence of the US President, who himself believed that “Russians need to show an iron fist and speak in a strong language.” An extensive summary of the speech was published in Pravda on March 11, 1946 (in Russia, almost the full text of the speech was published by Nezavisimaya Gazeta in May 1992). Having familiarized himself with the content of the speech and the circumstances in which it was delivered, Stalin regarded it as an ultimatum, a call for war with the USSR.
On March 12, 1947, US President G. Truman, in a message to Congress, specified the “policy of atomic blackmail” proposed by W. Churchill (“Truman Doctrine”). He proposed to “contain” the influence of the USSR by creating American military bases in Greece and Turkey, i.e., in countries that were sea gates to the Soviet Union. As a result, the United States identified two strategic tasks in relation to the USSR: at a minimum, to prevent further expansion of the sphere of influence of the USSR and its communist ideology (the doctrine of containing socialism), and, at a maximum, to force the USSR to withdraw from Central and Eastern Europe to its former borders (the doctrine of rolling back socialism).
An economic step towards achieving these goals was large-scale material assistance to 17 European countries (including West Germany), which made their economies dependent on the United States. It began to arrive in Europe in 1947 and was called "Marshall Plan"", named after the former Chief of Staff of the US Army, General J. Marshall, who was appointed US Secretary of State in January 1947.
A military step towards achieving the goals was the creation in April 1949 of a military-political bloc of 12 Western countries led by the United States (North Atlantic Pact, NATO). NATO includes Belgium, Iceland, Denmark, Canada, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Italy, Great Britain, France, and the USA. The creation of NATO consolidated the American military presence in Europe and became a decisive step for the United States on the path to world domination.
In 1954, the Americans created another military bloc, SEATO(“Southeast Asian Defense Treaty Organization”), consisting of the USA, England, France, Australia, New Zealand, Philippines, Thailand, Pakistan. The USSR regarded the creation of a new bloc as a threat to its security in this region.
A political step towards “containing” and “throwing back” the USSR was the support of anti-socialist forces within the countries of the Soviet bloc, even to the point of direct intervention in their internal affairs.
The sharp turn from cooperation to confrontation made in foreign policy by the recent allies immediately affected both the foreign and domestic policies of the Soviet state. Hopes for comprehensive post-war cooperation between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition collapsed; the world, divided by the Iron Curtain, entered an era "cold war"", which, either calming down or escalating, threatening to develop into the Third World War, lasted for about half a century (1946–1991).
Socialist camp. The measures taken by the USSR were adequate to those of the United States, but less effective. The forces were unequal, because the Soviet Union emerged from the war economically weakened, and the United States of America stronger.
First of all, the USSR accelerated work on the creation of nuclear weapons to eliminate the US nuclear monopoly. As a result, the Soviet atomic bomb was created in 1949, and the hydrogen bomb in 1953. In addition, the Soviet Union deployed large-scale assistance to the countries of “people's democracy”, creating a special organization for this purpose - Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). In January 1949, in Moscow, an agreement on the creation of CMEA was signed by representatives of 6 countries: Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR, Czechoslovakia. A month later, Albania joined the CMEA, in 1950 - the GDR, in 1962 - Mongolia, in 1972 - Cuba.
In May 1955, a military-political union of 8 socialist countries of Europe was created in Warsaw (Poland) - Warsaw Pact Organization (WTO). It included Albania (came out in 1968), Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Romania, USSR, Czechoslovakia.
In addition to the measures noted, the USSR actively promoted communist parties and movements of capitalist countries, contributed to the growth of the national liberation movement in the colonies, the collapse of the colonial system and the creation of countries with a “socialist orientation.” Finally, the Soviet Union did not hesitate to use armed forces to directly suppress anti-socialist protests in a number of countries (GDR, Hungary, Czechoslovakia).
German question. A symbol of the split of the world into two opposing socio-economic systems - capitalism and socialism - was the split of Germany into two states - the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic. The German question was considered at six sessions of the Council of Foreign Ministers (CMFA), held in 1945–1949. According to the Declaration of the Defeat of Germany, signed on June 5, 1945, the supreme power in the country was temporarily exercised by the governments of the USSR, USA, Great Britain and France. Germany was divided into 4 occupation zones, in each of which power belonged to the commander-in-chief of the occupying forces. After the demilitarization of the economy, denazification and democratization of the socio-political system, it was planned to restore a united Germany and conclude a peace treaty with it.
However, in August 1946, the United States and England began developing a plan to merge their zones of occupation, which contradicted previously adopted quadripartite decisions. At the end of 1947, the Anglo-American Bisonia was created. In 1948, the French zone of occupation joined it. The new unification of West German lands became known as "Trisonia". At the same time, a course was set for the split of Berlin.
In June 1948, separate monetary reforms were carried out in the western sectors of Germany and Berlin, which threatened to disrupt the economy in the Soviet zone. This forced the USSR to tighten controls on the West Berlin border and on communications that connected it with West Germany. The USA and England, accusing the USSR of the “blockade of Berlin”, created an air bridge to communicate with its western sectors. The first serious international conflict arose after the war, which went down in history as Berlin crisis. To get out of it, on August 2, 1948, Stalin proposed to abolish the special currency (mark “B”) in the western sectors of Berlin and introduce the currency of the Soviet zone in Berlin.
The Berlin crisis was resolved only in May 1949 by the four powers lifting mutual restrictions on communications, transport and trade between Berlin and the western zones and between the eastern zone and the western zones of Germany. A few months later, the split of Germany was finally completed and legally consolidated. On August 14, 1949, elections to the Bundestag were held in West Germany; on September 12, it elected the President, and on September 15, the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The first federal chancellor was K. Adenauer, an active supporter of the restoration of Germany within the borders of 1938.
Under these conditions, in October 1949, the leadership of the USSR, which had previously insisted on preserving a united Germany, considered it expedient to create the German Democratic Republic in its occupation zone. Her birthday was October 7, 1949. The leader of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED), W. Pieck, was elected the first president of the GDR. The USSR transferred control functions to the GDR that previously belonged to the Soviet Military Administration in Germany (SVAG). Instead of the SVAG, the Soviet Control Commission (SCC) was created, designed to monitor the implementation by the German Democratic Republic of the quadripartite decisions regarding Germany. The USSR and the GDR exchanged diplomatic missions.
The existence of two independent German states and a special entity - West Berlin - became an element of instability in the center of Europe for many years (until the early 1970s).
The beginning of a split in the socialist camp. The USSR's course towards strengthening its positions in Europe was not consistent. The desire of the Soviet leadership for the unconditional subordination of the countries of the “socialist camp” was met in 1948–1949. to the resistance of the leadership of socialist Yugoslavia led by Josip Broz Tito. As a result, the USSR recalled its specialists from Yugoslavia, sharply reduced economic assistance, and forced other socialist countries to take similar measures. In October 1949, diplomatic relations were severed between the USSR and Yugoslavia and inter-party ties were terminated. This had far-reaching consequences. The split that began in the socialist camp and in the communist movement, despite periods of calm and reconciliation, subsequently deepened, expanded and ended in their collapse.
Korean War. The axis of confrontation between the two systems during the Cold War era was the Soviet-American confrontation, the severity of which determined the climate of international relations. The most formidable event of this confrontation in the last years of Stalin's rule was korean war(1950–1953).
Soon after the victory of the people's revolution in China and the proclamation of the People's Republic of China (October 1, 1949), which was greatly facilitated by the assistance of the USSR, the leadership of North Korea (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, DPRK), encouraged by the Soviet leadership, made an attempt to reunify by armed means country, overthrowing the pro-American regime of South Korea.
The USSR withdrew its troops from Korea in 1948, the USA in 1949. The country was divided into two parts along the 38th parallel. On June 25, 1950, citing the fact that the troops of South Korea (the Syngman Lee regime) had invaded the DPRK, the head of the North Korean government, Kim Il Sung, ordered his troops to launch a counteroffensive. He declared the war that had started “a war for unification, independence, freedom and democratization of the homeland.”
Successful at first, the operation was defeated and threatened to escalate into a world war after the intervention of US troops under the UN flag. The Americans took advantage of the short-sightedness of the Soviet leaders, who since January 1950 declared a boycott of the UN Security Council in protest against the refusal to replace the representative of the Kuomintang China in the Council with a representative of the PRC. On June 27, 1950, due to the absence of a representative of the USSR with veto power, the United States passed a resolution through the UN Security Council calling on UN members to provide the necessary assistance to South Korea. On July 7, the Americans received the right to call their troops sent to Korea “UN troops.”
The PRC armed forces (“Chinese volunteers”) took the side of the DPRK. Together, on January 4, 1951, they occupied Seoul. The USSR also took an active part in the war without directly interfering in military operations. The Soviet government transferred several fighter aviation divisions to China, which for two and a half years participated in repelling American raids on China, transferred a large number of aircraft and other military equipment to China, and contributed to the creation of tank, artillery, anti-aircraft and engineering troops.
The USSR supplied the Korean People's Army and "Chinese volunteers" with weapons, ammunition, transport, fuel, food, and medicine. He prepared “as a last resort” five divisions for direct dispatch to Korea. Stalin insisted on a tough policy towards the enemy.
In 1951, US President Henry Truman announced the possible use of nuclear weapons against China, which was declared an aggressor for participating in the war on the side of the DPRK. In 1952, the new US President D. Eisenhower promised to end the Korean War. After Stalin's death, it was ended on July 27, 1953 through diplomatic efforts. According to the concluded truce, the demarcation line ran in accordance with the actual location of the troops of both sides, mainly along the 38th parallel.
The Geneva Conference of the Five Great Powers (April-July 1954) formalized the division of Korea into two states. It also demarcated Vietnam along the 17th parallel. Divided into parts, Korea and Vietnam became a symbol of the split of the world into two systems on the Asian continent.
From the book History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates author Anisimov Evgeniy ViktorovichForeign policy of the USSR in the 1920s - early. 1930s In January 1920, the Entente lifted the blockade of Soviet Russia. This meant the end of the war and de facto recognition of political reality. The Bolsheviks completely controlled the former Russia, they defended its unity (with the loss of Poland,
From the book History of Russia XX - early XXI centuries author Tereshchenko Yuri Yakovlevich1. Foreign policy of the USSR “Cold War”. The post-war 8-year development of the USSR proceeded in anticipation of the third world war. Its threat was defined by W. Churchill's Fulton speech. On March 5, 1946, the retired British Prime Minister spoke on his own behalf at Westminster
From the book History. Russian history. Grade 11. Advanced level. Part 1 author Volobuev Oleg Vladimirovich§ 34 – 35. Foreign policy of the USSR Strengthening international positions. The breaking of the foreign policy blockade of the USSR began with the Genoa Conference (1922), in which 29 states participated. Western countries demanded compensation from Russia in the amount of 18 billion rubles. gold lost in
author Volobuev Oleg Vladimirovich§ 26. FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR STRENGTHENING INTERNATIONAL POSITIONS. The breaking of the foreign policy blockade of the USSR after the establishment of diplomatic relations with Germany in 1922 led to its international recognition. By the beginning of 1923, the Soviet Union had its representatives already in 12
From the book History of Russia [Tutorial] author Team of authors11.6. Foreign policy of the USSR The victory of Soviet troops in the battle of Moscow accelerated the formation of the anti-Hitler coalition, the main core of which were the three great powers - the USSR, the USA and Great Britain. The first steps to create a military-political union of states and
From the book History of Russia. XX – early XXI centuries. 9th grade author From the book History of Russia. XX - early XXI centuries. 9th grade author Kiselev Alexander Fedotovich§ 33. FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR: THE BURDEN OF A SUPERPOWER Relief of international tension. After the Caribbean crisis of 1962, the Soviet leadership identified priority tasks: détente between East and West, full support for countries focusing on
From the book Subject to disclosure. USSR-Germany, 1939-1941. Documents and materials author Felshtinsky Yuri GeorgievichFOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR. FROM THE REPORT OF V. M. MOLOTOV AT THE MEETING OF THE SUPREME COUNCIL OF THE USSR ON AUGUST 1, 1940 ... Our relations with Germany, a turn in which occurred almost a year ago, continue to be fully preserved, as stipulated by the Soviet-German agreement.
From the book History of Russia author Ivanushkina V V40. Foreign policy of the USSR in the late 1920-1930s In the foreign policy of the USSR in the late 1920-1930s. Three main periods can be distinguished: 1) 1928–1933. - an alliance with Germany opposing Western democracies; 2) 1933–1939. – gradual rapprochement with England, France and the USA in the conditions
From the book History of Russia author Ivanushkina V V47. Foreign policy of the USSR under N. S. Khrushchev At the 20th Congress of the CPSU, a new doctrine was formulated, which included two main points: 1) the multivariate ways of building socialism were recognized (with confirmation of the principle of “proletarian internationalism”, i.e. assistance
From the book History of Russia author Ivanushkina V V54. Foreign policy of the USSR during the years of perestroika At the turn of 1987–1988. a new foreign policy doctrine emerges, called “new political thinking.” The main principles of the new foreign policy were: 1) rejection of the fundamental conclusion about the split
From the book Domestic History: Lecture Notes author Kulagina Galina Mikhailovna18.1. Foreign policy of the USSR and international relations in the 1930s During the global economic crisis of 1929–1933. contradictions intensified and rivalry between the leading powers intensified, which led to the destruction of the Versailles-Washington system and a change in the balance of power in
author Barysheva Anna Dmitrievna63 FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR IN THE PRE-WAR YEARS After the German occupation of the entire Czech Republic in 1939, the Soviet Union found itself in an extremely difficult situation. Negotiations between the military missions of England, France and the USSR were unsuccessful. A. Hitler, who had already decided to start a war with Poland,
From the book National History. Crib author Barysheva Anna Dmitrievna67 FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR IN THE POST-WAR YEARS The defeat of the countries of the continental axis in the war radically changed the balance of forces in the world. The USSR turned into one of the leading world powers, without which not a single issue of international life could be resolved. However, the dominance and
From the book National History. Crib author Barysheva Anna Dmitrievna69 FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR IN THE MID-1950-1960s In the mid-1950-1960s. The foreign policy of the USSR was conducted in conditions of severe confrontation with Western countries. But nevertheless, the need to abandon harsh confrontation in interstate relations also became obvious.
From the book A Short Course in the History of Russia from Ancient Times to the Beginning of the 21st Century author Kerov Valery Vsevolodovich4. Foreign policy of the USSR 4.1. Strengthening the status of the USSR as a great power. After 1945, the Soviet Union became a recognized great power on the international stage. The number of countries that established diplomatic relations with it increased from 26 in the pre-war period to 52. Having become
Libmonster ID: RU-11946
The study of the peaceful foreign policy of the Soviet state is occupying an increasingly prominent place in the works of Soviet historians. If in 1954 - 1955. (as can be seen from the Book Chronicle for the corresponding years), about 50 books and brochures were published in Russian and other languages of the peoples of the USSR, and in 1959 - 1960. - over 110, then in 1961 - 1962. - already more than 140, not counting works in which separate chapters or paragraphs are devoted to the foreign policy of the USSR, and scientific articles. The range of institutions is expanding, the number of authors conducting research work on this issue is increasing. In addition to scientists from Moscow and Leningrad, specialists from Kyiv, Tashkent, Baku, Tbilisi, Yerevan, Tallinn and other scientific centers of the country actively participated in it. The Institute of International Relations, World Economy and International Relations, History, Peoples of Asia, Slavic Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, and a number of universities have intensified their efforts to prepare and publish books on the history of Soviet foreign policy.
Problems of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union began to be discussed more often than before at international scientific conferences. Thus, at a conference held in Prague in May 1961 with the participation of scientists from 11 countries, issues of the USSR’s struggle for European security in the post-war years were considered 1 . The Soviet-German scientific session, held in Moscow in April 1962, was dedicated to the 40th anniversary of the Treaty of Rapallo between Soviet Russia and Germany. The need to further intensify the work of international relations scholars was noted at the All-Union Conference of Historians in December 1962.
An in-depth analysis of Soviet foreign policy is contained in the documents of the XXII Congress of the CPSU, in the new Party Program. It shows that the main goal of the party’s foreign policy activities is to ensure favorable conditions for building communism in the USSR and the development of the world socialist system, and to rid humanity of a new world war. The program reveals the ways and means necessary to achieve this great goal and formulates specific tasks in the field of international relations. Particular attention is paid to the Leninist principle of peaceful coexistence. The general line of the USSR's foreign policy is comprehensively and deeply substantiated in the speeches of the head of the Soviet government N. S. Khrushchev 2. It was these documents, which determined the path of communist construction in our country, that provided the theoretical basis for research on foreign policy issues.
An important condition for the successful scientific development of the history of international politics of the USSR at various stages of its development is the continuous expansion of the documentary base. Very valuable work is carried out by the Commission for the Publication of Diplomatic Documents of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by A. A. Gromyko. In 1961 - 1963 it has published such publications as volumes V - VIII of the series "Documents of Foreign Policy of the USSR" and several thematic collections 3 . Published no-
Review of Soviet literature on the history of foreign policy of the USSR for 1954 - 1960. see: "Questions of History", 1961, No. 1.
1 For materials from this session, see: “European Security and the Threat of West German Militarism.” M. 1962.
2 See N. S. Khrushchev. On the foreign policy of the Soviet Union. 1960 T. I. January - May; Vol. 2. June - December. M. 1961; him. Communism is peace and happiness of peoples. T. I. January - September 1961; Vol. II. October - December 1961 M. 1962; him. Prevent war, defend peace! M. 1963.
3 See, for example, “USSR and Arab countries”. 1917 - 1960 Documents and materials. M. 1961 (for review by I. S. Isaykin, see: “Questions of History,” 1962, No. 8); "USSR and African countries." 1946 - 1962 Tt. I - II. M. 1963; "Documents and materials on the history of Soviet-Polish relations." T. I. February 1917 - November 1918. M. 1963 (collection prepared jointly with Polish historians).
The second edition of the materials of the VII Party Congress, much more complete than the previous one, showing the enormous work of the Central Committee, headed by V.I. Lenin, in concluding and ratifying the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty 4. In recent years, the attention of historians has been attracted by V.I. Lenin’s speeches in the bourgeois press, a significant part of which was previously unknown to a wide range of researchers 5 . Very useful work was carried out by M. I. Trush 6 . His book reproduces, step by step, in the form of a documentary chronicle, information about V. I. Lenin’s leadership of the foreign policy of the Soviet state for more than three years (until the end of 1920). It would be desirable to publish a work of a similar nature for the years 1921 - 1923. The fact that V. I. Lenin during this period continued to pay great attention to foreign policy and the most diverse forms of connections with the foreign world is evidenced, for example, by the diary of V. I. Lenin’s duty secretaries from November 21, 1922 to March 6, 1923 7, as well as materials cited by A. M. Gak 8. The publication of reports, articles, speeches, and interviews of the talented Soviet diplomat G.V. Chicherin for 1918 - 1928 is important for the study of Soviet foreign policy. It is also impossible not to note the publication of the main foreign policy acts and documents of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, its appeals, statements, and resolutions during the period after the 20th Congress of the CPSU - the period of greatest activity of Soviet diplomacy 10 . In our opinion, it would be desirable to periodically publish new issues of such a book, containing materials for subsequent years. There has been a noticeable increase in the publication of memoirs of Soviet diplomatic workers 11 . These sources help to recreate the picture of events, reveal the motives and circumstances of the foreign policy activities of governments and ministries, legislators and executives, as well as glean information and facts that are not reflected in the documents.
Thus, Soviet historians had at their disposal new valuable documents of creative Marxism-Leninism, as well as the opportunity to use a significant amount of new materials on the history of the international politics of the Soviet country, expanding the existing source base for research in this area.
How fully and successfully are existing favorable opportunities used? What are some of the progress made in problem solving over the past three years?
A significant number of works have already been written about the foreign policy of Soviet Russia in 1917 - 1924, when V.I. Lenin was at the head of the Soviet state, especially about the Decree on Peace and our country’s withdrawal from the imperialist war. But there are also significant gaps (both in the study of facts and in their analysis) in the scientific and theoretical interpretation of the foreign policy events of these years. In a number of cases
4 "Seventh Emergency Congress of the RCP (b)". Verbatim report. M. 1962.
5 See E.V. Klopov, L.M. Trofimova. Speeches by V.I. Lenin in the bourgeois press of foreign countries in 1917 - 1922. "History of the USSR", 1962, N 1; Yu. Sharapov. V. Shchukin. V.I. Lenin on peaceful coexistence (new materials). "New and Contemporary History", 1962, N 6; "Lenin and the American Labor Movement". Publication by I. Andropov. "New time". 1962, N 19.
6 M. I. Trush. Foreign policy activities of V.I. Lenin (1917 - 1920). Day after day. M. 1963. The book is equipped with an introductory article by the author, dedicated to V.I. Lenin’s struggle for peaceful coexistence with capitalist countries. For A. L. Ugryumov’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History”, 1963, No. 10.
7 See "Questions of the History of the CPSU", 1963, No. 2.
8 A. M. Gak. V.I. Lenin and the development of international cultural and scientific relations of Soviet Russia in 1920 - 1924. "Questions of History". 1963, No. 4.
9 G. V. Chicherin. Articles and speeches on issues of international politics. M. 1961.
10 "Collection of main acts and documents of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on foreign policy issues. 1956 - 1962." M. 1962.
11 I. M. Maisky. Spanish notebooks. M. 1962; him. Who helped Hitler. (From the memoirs of the Soviet ambassador). M. 1962. For A. M. Nekrich’s review of both books by I. M. Maisky, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 6; M. I. Kazanin. Notes from the mission secretary. A page from the history of the first years of Soviet diplomacy. M. 1962; N. N. Lyubimov, A. N. Erlikh. Genoa Conference. M. 1963, etc.
Recent studies have attempted to fill some of these gaps 12 .
One of the aspects of the policy of peaceful coexistence carried out under the direct leadership of V.I. Lenin (which has not received due attention in the literature) - its results in the sphere of international legal recognition of the Soviet state - is considered by S. Olenev 13. Summary outline of the external relations of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic in 1917 - 1920. first given by I. S. Khmel 14. A number of works examine the relations of Soviet Russia with individual countries or groups of countries. The relations of the Soviet republics with Western states are explored. Thematically related to the work of I. S. Khmel is the monograph by R. G. Simonenko, based on the use of a large range of Soviet, Polish, and Czechoslovak archival materials, many foreign publications and memoirs 15. It fairly fully analyzes the activities of the Paris Peace Conference in that part that concerns the redrawing of the post-war map of Europe at the expense of Russian and Ukrainian lands. New information about the anti-Soviet policy of American imperialism in the Far East is provided in the work of V. A. Boyarsky, who used documents from the Central State Archive of the Russian Federation of the USSR 16 . Anti-Soviet intrigues of the United States at the Genoa and Hague conferences are the topic of the book by V. F. Lopatin 17.
The use of a significant number of new documents from the Foreign Policy Archive (FPA) of the USSR and the CPA IML characterizes books on Soviet-German and Soviet-Czechoslovak relations. This enabled the authors to cover a wide range of issues of political and economic relations between the Soviet country and Germany and Czechoslovakia. A. A. Akhtamzyan examined the history of Soviet-German negotiations in the summer of 1918 and the provocative rupture of relations with Soviet Russia by the German imperialists in October of the same year 18. The collection of articles on the Treaty of Rapallo contains many new materials about Soviet-German relations in 1922 - 1923, especially about the almost unstudied negotiations in January - February 1922 in Berlin, about the events in Genoa that preceded the signing of the treaty, about the attitude of Western countries to the Treaty of Rapallo 19. V. A. Shishkin showed the inconsistency and duplicity of the Masaryk-Benes foreign policy. This book contains a lot of valuable information about the fraternal ties of the Soviet and Czechoslovak peoples, about the participation of Czechoslovak workers in the restoration of the National Economy of the USSR 20 .
Another group of insufficiently studied issues that have recently attracted the attention of researchers is the relations of the Soviet country with the states of the East. Significant results have been achieved in the study of the early period of relations with China. M.A. Persia shows the positive role of the Far Eastern Republic mission in Beijing in preparing favorable political conditions for direct Soviet-Chinese contacts 21 . Fresh information about the speeches of various sections of the Chinese-
13 S. Olenev. International recognition of the USSR. M. 1962.
14 I. S. Khmel. With the banner of peace through the flames of war. Diplomatic activities of the Ukrainian SSR (1917 - 1920). Kyiv. 1962 (in Ukrainian). For A.I. Stepanov’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History”, 1963, No. 6.
15 R. G. Simonenko. Imperialist policy of the Entente and the United States towards Ukraine in 1919. Kyiv. 1962 (in Ukrainian).
16 V. A. Boyarsky. The invasion of US imperialists into Soviet Russia and its failure. M. 1961.
17 V. F. Lopatin. The failure of the US anti-Soviet plans. Genoa - The Hague. M. 1963.
18 A. Akhtamzyan. From Brest to Kiel. The failure of the anti-Soviet policy of German imperialism c. 1918 M. 1963.
19 "Treaty of Rapallo and the problem of peaceful coexistence." "Materials of the scientific session dedicated to the 40th anniversary of the Treaty of Rapallo (April 25 - 28, 1962)." M. 1963. The authors of the articles are V. M. Khvostov. I. K. Koblyakov, L. A. Bezymensky, I. N. Zemskov, D. S. Davidovich.
20 V. A. Shishkin. Czechoslovak-Soviet relations in 1918 - 1925. M. 1962.
21 M. A. Persits. Far Eastern Republic and China. The role of the Far Eastern Republic in the struggle of the Soviet government for friendship with China. M. 1962. For L. A. Berezny’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 4.
of the population in favor of recognition of Soviet Russia is argued by R. A. Mirovitskaya 22. There are noticeable positive changes in the study of Soviet-Turkish relations. S.I. Kuznetsova talks about negotiations between the RSFSR, Ukraine, the Transcaucasian republics, on the one hand, and Turkey, on the other, as well as the conclusion of treaties in 1921 - 1922, about the moral, political and material support provided to Turkey by Soviet Russia 23 . A. Kh. Babakhodzhaev exposes England’s attempts to prevent the establishment of good neighborly relations between Soviet Russia and Afghanistan and Iran 24. The history of Soviet-Turkish relations over a fairly long period, both political, economic and cultural, was developed by I. F. Chernikov 25. The listed works, taken together, convincingly show how much assistance already in those years the Soviet country provided to the economically underdeveloped states of the East that were fighting for political independence. The theoretician and practical leader of this policy was V.I. Lenin. It is traditional for the USSR, and any attempts by bourgeois historians to distort it cannot but meet with the most decisive rebuff on our part.
These are some of the results of the study in 1961 - 1963. that period in the history of Soviet foreign policy when it was directly led by V.I. Lenin.
Significantly less results have been achieved in developing the history of Soviet foreign policy from the mid-20s to the Second World War, although these periods have been poorly studied before. Here, in addition to the mentioned work by I. F. Chernikov, only the monograph by S. Yu. Vygodsky 26 can be mentioned, which for the first time summarizes a significant amount of factual material on the period under consideration. Oka also contains new information, mainly on issues of international proletarian solidarity with the USSR and partly on the history of its business relations with capitalist countries. But in this work, foreign documentary publications, foreign press, and especially Soviet archival documents are not sufficiently used (for example, materials from the USSR WUA are not used at all). General outline of the foreign policy of the USSR in 1924 - 1939. given in volume IX of World History 27, and Soviet-English relations between the two world wars - in the monographs of V. G. Trukhanovsky and others 28.
The main issue of Soviet foreign policy during the Great Patriotic War, which was developed in recent years, was the relationship of the USSR with England and the USA. Based on the materials of the AVP, I. N. Zemskov reveals the history of negotiations on the opening of a second front in Europe, which was diligently falsified by Western historians and memoirists 29 . This story largely turns out to be a story of sabotage, rather than the preparation of major military operations against a common enemy on the part of the governments of the United States and England. The major work on the history of the Great Patriotic War, in chapters devoted to foreign policy and the international position of the Soviet Union, also examines primarily military-diplomatic relations with the allies in 1943 - 1945 30 . These chapters contain
22 R. A. Mirovitskaya. Movement in China for recognition of Soviet Russia (1920 - 1924). M. 1962.
23 S. I. Kuznetsova. Establishment of Soviet-Turkish relations (to the 40th anniversary of the Moscow Treaty between the RSFSR and Turkey). M. 1961.
24 A. Kh. Babakhodzhaev. The failure of British policy in Central Asia and the Middle East (1918 - 1924). M. 1962; For A. I. Zevelev’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1962, No. 12.
25 I. F. Chernikov. Soviet-Turkish relations in 1923 - 1935. Kyiv. 1962 (in Ukrainian).
26 S. Yu. Vygodsky. Foreign policy of the USSR. 1924 - 1929 M. 1963.
27 "World History". T. IX. M. 1962. - Authors of the relevant sections: V. G. Trukhanovsky, G. N. Sevostyanov, N. N. Yakovlev, A. M. Nekrich. For a review of this book by I. S. Kashkin, N. D. Korobov, A. F. Ostaltseva, M. S. Persov, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 10.
28 V. G. Trukhanovsky. Foreign policy of England at the first stage of the general crisis of capitalism (1918 - 1939). M. 1962, etc.
29 I. N. Zemskov. From the diplomatic history of the second front in Europe (1941 - 1944). Documentary essay. M. 1961.
30 "History of the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union. 1941 - 1945." T. 3. M. 1961; t. 4. M. 1962; Vol. 5. M. 1963.
new materials about the desire of the people of England and the United States to effectively help the Soviet Union and speed up the end of the war, about the work of the Moscow, Tehran, Crimean conferences, about the activities of the USSR delegation in the European Advisory Commission. So far, relations between the USSR and the Eastern states during the war years have been studied much less thoroughly 31 .
One of the characteristic features of the study of Soviet foreign policy is the decisive increase in levies in the last decade, marked by outstanding successes in the struggle for peaceful coexistence. During these years, a new type of international relations between socialist states strengthened and became one of the most important factors in modern development; at the same time, the Soviet Union established relations with dozens of countries that had liberated themselves from colonial bondage, and provided and continues to provide them with moral, political and economic assistance. The study of how Lenin's ideas and principles of foreign policy of the Soviet state are implemented at the present stage is, therefore, an extremely relevant matter for Soviet scientists. It is no coincidence that the total number of works on the post-war period increases noticeably every year. Particularly gratifying is the appearance, along with essays, popular publications, of a number of major works, mainly collective ones.
The most serious study on the history of international relations and foreign policy of the USSR in the first post-war five years is a book prepared by the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the USSR Academy of Sciences 32 . By analyzing the history of the first post-war years, it shows how the practically world socialist system began to determine the main content and features of the development of international relations. Noting some mistakes and shortcomings generated by the cult of personality, the authors showed that the general line of Soviet foreign policy was correct and analyzed its goals, nature and methods. The book successfully combines a deep theoretical understanding of the factual material with its generalized presentation.
A thorough study of one of the central problems of Soviet foreign policy - the USSR's struggle for disarmament over the fifteen post-war years - is another collective work 33, the authors of which examine in detail the essence of the problem, its components and thoroughly analyze the course of the political struggle around its solution. They show the reality and feasibility of Soviet disarmament projects, which is currently confirmed by such a major success of the peace-loving foreign policy of the USSR as the conclusion of an agreement banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in space and under water. The authors are well acquainted with the issues under study (some of them were directly involved in negotiations with Western countries), they make extensive use of UN documents and materials (the texts of the main proposals of the Soviet Union on the issue of disarmament, introduced after the Second World War, are given in the appendix to the book), press of a number of countries, special literature.
The struggle of the Soviet Union for disarmament and international cooperation in the post-war period is described in the works of D. I. Kudryavtsev and M. Ermagabetov, containing an analysis of Soviet international legal acts and concepts such as disarmament, reduction and limitation of weapons, etc. 34 and in the book by O. V. Bogdanov,
31 One can only point to the book by D.I. Goldberg, “Japanese Foreign Policy in 1941 - 1945.” (M. 1962), containing several interesting paragraphs about Soviet-Japanese relations.
32 "International relations after the Second World War." T. I (1945 - 1949). M. 1962. The authors of the relevant chapters and paragraphs are: V. B. Knyazhinsky, D. G. Tomashevsky, Sh. P. Sanakoev, Ya. M. Shavrov, V. M. Khaitsman, Yu. M. Melnikov, I. I Orlik. For V.I. Popov’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History”, 1963, No. 9.
33 "The Struggle of the Soviet Union for Disarmament. 1946 - 1960." M. 1961. Authors: V. I. Menzhinsky, A. S. Piradov, V. A. Zorin, P. F. Shakhov, A. N. Shevchenko, I. G. Usachev.
34 D. I. Kudryavtsev. The USSR's struggle for disarmament after the Second World War. International legal essay. M. 1962; M. Ermagabetov. The USSR guards the peace and security of nations. Alma-Ata. 1961.
showing the logic, consistency and purposefulness of Soviet proposals aimed at banning nuclear weapons tests 35 . The struggle of the USSR in the UN to solve pressing international problems is considered by G. I. Morozov 36 .
The study of relations between the Soviet Union and the countries of the socialist camp is becoming increasingly widespread - this is natural and absolutely correct. Various problems of these relations are studied unevenly. Very few special works on the new type of international political relations have been published. One can only name the work of N. Kapchenko 37, who examines the basic principles of the foreign policy of socialist countries and emphasizes that for all states of the socialist camp, their international policy is, first of all, a tireless, decisive and consistent struggle against thermonuclear war, based on a specific and real program for peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems. Much greater results have been achieved in the study of economic relations between socialist countries. New patterns inherent in the socialist economic system and the main forms of economic cooperation between the countries that are members of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance are studied in the monograph by N. I. Ivanov 38 .
Generally successful attempts to theoretically comprehend and explain the facts presented, to reveal the patterns of development of the world system of socialism as a community of fraternal countries based on the principles of socialist internationalism, were carried out by I. V. Dudinsky 39 . His works reveal the enormous economic effect of cooperation based on the international division of labor within the socialist camp. A special study of the characteristic features and characteristics of this division of labor, its role in strengthening the economic power, unity and cohesion of the world socialist system is a collective work prepared by the Institute of Economics of the World Socialist System of the USSR Academy of Sciences 40. It shows that the socialist division of labor ensures the greatest efficiency of economic development not only of the camp as a whole, but of each socialist country, contributes to the gradual overcoming of historical differences in their economic development and the creation of a material basis for the transition of all peoples of socialist countries to communism within one historical era.
An undoubted success in studying the problems of the world socialist camp is the writing of works on relations between the countries of the socialist camp and individual Soviet republics. And, F. Evseev published a study on political, economic and cultural cooperation between the Ukrainian SSR and the Polish People's Republic in the war and post-war years 41. It highlights both the unity of action in the struggle for peace and friendship between peoples, and the friendly resolution of a number of practical issues in the relationship between Ukraine and Poland. The author examines various forms of economic ties between them - the development of trade, scientific and technical cooperation, exchange of experience in the field of industry and agriculture, growing contacts in the fields of culture, science, literature, and art. Unfortunately, the book sometimes lacks generalization of specific information: “examples and facts” predominate. From the works published in other Union republics, it follows that
35 O. V. Bogdanov. Nuclear disarmament. M. 1961.
36 G. I. Morozov. United Nations. (Basic international legal aspects of structure and activities). M. 1962.
37 N. Kapchenko. The foreign policy of socialist countries is a policy of peace. M. 2961.
38 N. I. Ivanov. Economic cooperation and mutual assistance of socialist countries. M. 1962.
39 I. V. Dudinsky. The world system of socialism and the laws of its development. M. 1961.
40 "Socialist international division of labor." M. 1961. Authors: I. P. Oleynik, A. M. Voinov, I. I. Semenov, S. V. Plaksin, I. P. Kachalov, L. S. Semenova, I. V. Storozhev, G. B. Gertsovich, V. P. Sergeev, A. Alihodzic. Under the general editorship of I. P. Oleinik.
41 I. F. Evseev. Cooperation between the Ukrainian SSR and the Polish People's Republic (1944 - 1960). Kyiv. 1962. For B. S. Popkov’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 11.
mark the books of R. Kuliev, who collected facts of recent years characterizing the cultural and scientific ties of Azerbaijan with the countries of people's democracy 42, and M. Ryskulbekov, who covers the economic ties of Kyrgyzstan 43. A useful summary of Soviet-Mongolian relations over 40 years was given by D. B. Ulymzhiev, who used some new documents from the archives of Ulan-Ude and Irkutsk 44 . The main attention was paid to his assessment of the role of the USSR in protecting the national independence and freedom of the Mongolian People's Republic.
In recent years, post-war relations between the Soviet Union and the countries of the East have attracted much and well-deserved attention from researchers. And here this attention is paid mainly to the study of economic relations. A number of monographs have been written and published on this topic 45 . The great interest in these issues is understandable. The main content of these works is an analysis of the fundamental, qualitative difference in the policies of socialist and imperialist states in the countries of the East and Latin America. Interesting material, brought together for the first time, summarizing the main problems of relations between the USSR and one of the largest countries in Asia - Indonesia - was collected in the book by Yu. Aleshin 46. Here, issues of political, economic and cultural cooperation are comprehensively considered, and the great importance of Soviet assistance for strengthening the independence of the Indonesian state is noted.
A significant number of monographs on individual periods or problems of Soviet foreign policy created more favorable conditions than before for the writing of generalizing works. Some of them are devoted to the relations of the Soviet Union with individual countries or groups of countries over all the years of the existence of the Soviet state. Among them, first of all, L. N. Kutakov’s study on Soviet-Japanese relations 47 should be named, which was highly praised in the press. This topic is very complex, requiring the study of a huge amount of material and special language training. Until recently, the number of studies on Soviet-Japanese relations was small. L.N. Kutakov has a new word in developing the problem. The author used large and varied archival material, mainly from the USSR WUA, as well as Japanese documents, prints and special literature, which gave him the opportunity to thoroughly cover such issues as the Soviet-Japanese negotiations in 1923, relations between the two countries on fishing and concession issues, the position of Japan during the Great Patriotic War.
The work of L. B. Teplinsky, who analyzes the history of traditionally friendly Soviet-Afghan relations 48, also deserves a generally positive assessment.
42 Rza Kuliev. Our friendly relations (international relations of the AzSSR). Baku. 1961.
43 M. Ryskulbekov. Economic cooperation of the Kirghiz SSR with the union republics and socialist countries. Frunze. 1962.
44 D. B. Ulymzhiev. The unbreakable fraternal friendship of the Soviet and Mongolian peoples. Ulan-Ude. 1961.
45 "USSR and the countries of the East. Economic and cultural cooperation." M. 1961. Authors: G. M. Prokhorov, I. P. Bankov, O. V. Vaskov, L. M. Gataullina, I. V. Samylovsky; L. A. Fituni, V. D. Shchetinin. Problems of assistance to economically underdeveloped countries. M. 1961; M. V. Lavrichenko. Economic cooperation of the USSR with the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. M. 1961; "Economic cooperation of the Soviet Union with economically underdeveloped countries." M. 1962. Authors: A. A. Polyak, G. S. Akopyan, O. D. Ulrikh, V. V. Alekseev, B. A. Zhebrak, I. A. Koloskov, V. A. Lyubimov, L. A. Fituni, P. N. Tretyakov, A. S. Kodachenko; V. V. Rymalov. USSR and economically underdeveloped countries. M. 1963; P. N. Tretyakov. Economic independence and two types of assistance to African countries. M. 1963.
46 Yu. Aleshin. Soviet-Indonesian relations. M. 1963. For A.P. Lavrentiev’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History”, 1963, No. 11.
47 L. N. Kutakov. History of Soviet-Japanese diplomatic relations. M. 1962. The publication of this monograph was preceded by the release of the book: L. N. Kutakov. Portsmouth Peace Treaty (from the history of relations between Japan and Russia and the USSR. 1905 - 1945). M. 1961. One of the chapters of this work highlights the struggle of the Soviet state for the development of good neighborly relations with Japan in 1917 - 1945.
48 L. B. Teplinsky. Soviet-Afghan relations. 1919 - 1960. Brief sketch. M. 1961; see also Yu. M. Golovin. Soviet Union and Afghanistan. Experience of economic cooperation. M. 1962.
Revealing the repeated attempts of the imperialists to interfere with the friendship of the USSR and Afghanistan, the author shows what role Soviet assistance played in preserving and strengthening the independence of Afghanistan, as well as in the development of its economy. The consistently friendly position of the USSR towards the Arab countries for 45 years, the protection of their political sovereignty and economic independence are discussed in a substantive collective work 49 . The authors analyze the role of the Great October Socialist Revolution in the historical destinies of the Arab peoples, for whom favorable international political conditions were created in the struggle against colonialism and imperialism. The Soviet Union did not recognize either the mandate system that existed between the two world wars, or the various forms of post-war neo-colonialist policies of Western imperialists in the Arab East. The authors rightly emphasize that relations between the Soviet Union and the Arab states have always been built on the principles of equality, mutual recognition of sovereign rights, friendship and peaceful coexistence.
Along with studies of the complex problems of relations between the Soviet Union and the countries of the East, somewhat more attention began to be paid to the analysis of its relations with individual Western bourgeois states. Among the monographic works of this kind, the book by V.N. Beletsky 50 can be mentioned, which was the result of studying a wide range of Soviet and Austrian documents. The author reveals the position of the Soviet Union, which was not only a supporter of the independence and state independence of Austria, but also actively fought against the infringement of its sovereignty, and in every possible way contributed to the demilitarization, denazification and democratization of the country. Separate sections in works on the foreign policy of these countries are also devoted to the post-war relations of the USSR with a number of other capitalist countries 51 . A monographic study of relations between the USSR and the USA throughout their entire length has not yet been crowned with significant results. A general assessment of Soviet-American relations at various stages is contained in the monographs of N. N. Inozemtsev and N. N. Yakovlev 52.
Significantly greater results have been achieved in the creation of works summarizing the history of the foreign policy activities of the Soviet country over 45 years as a whole. Among them, the book devoted to the analysis of the general line of foreign policy of the USSR 53 should be named first. This work examines the socio-political, ideological, economic, international legal aspects of peaceful coexistence. Particular attention is paid to the development and implementation of the policy of peaceful coexistence after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. Now this policy must ensure not just a long peaceful respite, but peace between states and peoples for the entire historical period, during which countries with different social systems will coexist.
A fruitful attempt to characterize the peculiarities of individual historical stages of Soviet foreign policy was made by M. E. Airapetyan and G. A. Deborin 54 .
49 "Soviet-Arab friendly relations". Digest of articles. M. 1961. Authors V.V. Vladimirov, V.P. Lutsky. L. N. Vatolina, M. F. Gataullin, B. M. Dantzig, I. M. Smilyanskaya, V. I. Kiselev, L. N. Kotlov, V. M. Fedorenko, R. G. Landa.
50 V. N. Beletsky. Soviet Union and Austria. The struggle of the Soviet Union for the revival of independent democratic Austria and the establishment of friendly relations with it (1938 - 1960). M. 1962.
51 See, for example, A. S. Protopopov. Italian foreign policy after the Second World War. Brief essay. M. 1963. (For S.I. Dorofeev’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 11); N. N. Molchanov. Foreign policy of France. (Fifth Republic). M. 1961.
52 N. N. Inozemtsev. US foreign policy in the era of imperialism. M. 1960 (for V.I. Popov’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1961, No. 12); N. N. Yakovlev. Recent US history. 1917 - 1960. M. 1961. For L. I. Zubok’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History.” 1963, No. 3.
53 "Peaceful coexistence - Lenin's foreign policy course of the Soviet Union." M. 1962. General edition by A. A. Gromyko. Authors: M. V. Barabanov, E. V. Vladimirov, G. P. Zadorozhny, G. V. Zisman, I. M. Ivanov, I. A. Kirilin, N. N. Lyubimov, I. A. Ornatsky, A. Ya. Popov, A. N. Sergeev, V. A. Shishkin. For N. I. Lebedev’s review of this book, see: “Questions of History,” 1963, No. 4.
54 M. E. Airapetyan, G. A. Deborin. Stages of USSR foreign policy. M. 1961.
The authors revealed the real connection and interdependence of foreign and domestic policies, and expressed a number of interesting considerations about the features of diplomatic tactics at certain stages of the international policy of the Soviet country. The division proposed by M. E. Airapetyan and G. A. Deborin into two strategic periods and a number of stages within these periods seems quite acceptable, with the exception of two points: firstly, the end of the restoration period in 1924 and the dating of the beginning of the socialist reconstruction of the national economy ( and, accordingly, the next stage of foreign policy) in 1925, because here there is an unjustified deviation from the general periodization of the history of Soviet society; secondly, the allocation in the independent period 1950 - 1953. as a stage in the struggle of the Soviet Union to eliminate the military adventures of imperialism. This struggle, as is known, was carried out both before and after these years, and in relation to the internal history of the USSR, these years cannot in any way be considered as a separate stage 55. The authors believe that there are two main principles of Soviet foreign policy: one relates to relations with capitalist countries (peaceful coexistence), the other - with socialist ones (proletarian internationalism). Relations with the third group of countries - young national states that won independence in the post-war years - are also brought under the second principle by M. Hayrapetyan and G. Deborin. They question the existence of a separate, third basic principle - respect for the national dignity and sovereignty of other countries and peoples, support for their struggle to conquer and strengthen state independence. Therefore, the nature of interstate relations between the USSR and a large group of such national states is essentially identified in the book (from the point of view of political principles) with the nature of relations between the Soviet Union and socialist countries, although there are not only common features, but also certain differences.
The teaching aids published in recent years 56 make a positive impression. In two volumes of a three-volume set published by the staff of the Institute of International Relations, ed. V. G. Trukhanovsky, a detailed description of international relations of modern times is given. In some cases, the authors use new materials, for example, about the diplomatic struggle in 1939, about Soviet-American relations during the Great Patriotic War. But the design of these books, in which Soviet foreign policy is considered primarily in connection with the development of international relations and is not always linked to the internal politics of the Soviet Union, nevertheless narrowed the possibilities of the authors: while sufficient attention was paid to diplomatic relations with Western countries, very little was given to economic relations . The same impression remains from the textbook published by the Higher Party School under the CPSU Central Committee. In addition, I would like to see the activities of individual Soviet diplomats more widely disclosed in new editions of these books and their characteristics given.
The new, significantly expanded and improved edition of the Diplomatic Dictionary (two volumes of this three-volume set have already become available to the reader) 57 is of great help to students of the history of international politics of the Soviet Union.
Due to the fact that interest in foreign policy issues is growing more and more, as was rightly discussed at the June (1963) Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, the publication of not only scientific, but also popular science literature is becoming important. Various publishing houses have published a number of useful brochures about the USSR’s struggle for peace and disarmament
55 Similar considerations on issues of periodization are found in the review of this book by P. I. Kabanov ("History of the USSR", 1962, No. 2).
56 "History of international relations and foreign policy of the USSR." T. I, 1917 - 1939 M. 1961; Vol. II, 1939 - 1945 M. 1962. Authors: L. A. Nikiforov, A. D. Nikonov, A. A. Akhtamzyan, P. V. Milogradov, L. I. Zubok, F. D. Volkov, G. L. Rozanov, I. A. Kirilin, V. B. Knyazhinsky, P. P. Savostyanov, L. N. Kutakov, V. T. Trukhanovsky, A. N. Krasilnikov, V. I. Antyukhina-Moskovchenko, N. I. Lebedev, D. G. Tomashevsky, N. N. Yakovlev, S. A. Gonionsky, I. V. Kozmenko, N. P. Komolova, V. B. Ushakov, A. I. Pushkash; "International relations and foreign policy of the USSR (1917 - 1960)". M. "1961. Authors: F. G. Zuev, E. M. Ivanova, I. F. Ivashin, V. P. Nikhamin, S. P. Samarsky.
57 "Diplomatic Dictionary". T. I. A-I. M. 1960; Vol. II. K. -P. M. 1961.
and international cooperation at the present stage 58, about the relations of the Soviet Union with socialist 59, capitalist 60 and economically underdeveloped 61 countries. Most of these brochures contain recent material and cover events of recent years, although in some cases the authors also touch upon events of previous decades 62 . Politizdat, in addition, took an initiative that certainly deserves support by publishing the “Library of Foreign Policy of the USSR,” which included 8 brochures on topical contemporary issues intended for listeners of the party education network 63 . Another series of popular science works, which highlight some issues of foreign relations of our country in the post-war years, are brochures published by the Publishing House of the Institute of International Relations on the foreign policies of individual socialist, capitalist and young national states 64 . Separate chapters or paragraphs of these books are devoted to the relations of these states with the Soviet Union. Ukrainian historians have published a number of popular works about the fraternal ties of the Ukrainian SSR with the peoples of the countries of the socialist camp 65 .
Much less often are attempts made to publish publications aimed at the mass reader, which would reflect Soviet foreign policy over a long period, including the pre-war period, although the existing works of this kind deserve a positive assessment. As an example, we can cite books about Soviet-American relations 66 .
In recent years, another shift has occurred in the publication of literature for the mass reader: historical and biographical essays about Soviet diplomats began to be published. Among such works, one cannot help but evaluate as successful the book by R. Karlova about L. B. Krasin 67,
58 See S. Viskov, V. Polyakov, A. Protopopov, A. Chubaryan. The CPSU program and the foreign policy of the USSR. M. 1963; V. M. Khaitsman. Soviet Union. Disarmament. World. Events and facts. 1917 - 1962. M. 1962; A. O. Chubaryan. Stages of struggle. (The USSR's struggle for disarmament). 1917 - 1962. M. 1962; M. Baturin, S. Tarov. Foreign policy of the Soviet Union at the present stage. M. 1962; L. M. Gromov, V. I. Strigachev. The problem of disarmament is the main issue of our time. M. 1963; V. A. Semenov. The key to peace (on the problem of disarmament). M. 1962; N.V. Bereznyakov. The USSR is at the forefront of the struggle for peace. Kishinev.
59 P. A. Lyakhov. World system of socialism. L. 1962; V. S. Bruz. The Commonwealth of Socialist Countries is a powerful factor of peace. Kyiv. 1961 (in Ukrainian); I. M. Kulinich, I. A. Petere. Economic cooperation of the Ukrainian SSR with the countries of socialism. Kyiv. 1962 (in Ukrainian), etc.
60 V.V. Pokhlebkin. Finland and the Soviet Union. M. 1961.
61 R. G. Iskanderov. Soviet Union to underdeveloped countries. M. 1961; I. A. Kapranov. Two types of help. M. 1962; V. D. Slutsky. India and the USSR. Kyiv. 1961 (in Ukrainian); A. I. Belgorodsky, V. N. Ge. USSR - to the peoples of three continents. M. 1963, etc.
62 See, for example, G.K. Seleznev. The collapse of the conspiracy. US aggression against the Soviet state in 1917 - 1920. M. 1963.
63 S. Skachkov, V. Sergeev. G. Shevyakov. Help and cooperation for peace (economic cooperation of the USSR with the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America). M. 1962; V. Mikhailov. End the remnants of World War II in Europe. M. 1962; L. Kharlamova. Colonialism has no place on earth. M. 1962; Vl. Ushakov. Soviet Union and the UN. M. 1962; N. Arkadyev. General disarmament is the path to lasting peace. M. 1962; V. Granov. The main goal of the foreign policy of the USSR." M. 1962; D. Karaundzhev, V. Kryuchkov, D. Nikolaev. Strengthening and development of the world system of socialism. M. 1962; B. Leontiev. The hearts of millions are with us. The foreign policy of the USSR meets the interests of all Peoples, M. 1962.
64 E. Novoseltsev. Foreign policy of Austria. M. 1962; L. Alekseev. Soviet Union and Iran. M. 1962; A. Osipov. Foreign policy of the Mongolian People's Republic. M. 1963, etc.
65 S. Zhurba. Fraternal cooperation. Kyiv. 1961 (in Ukrainian); "Friendship is stronger than steel. (Cooperation of enterprises and research institutions of the Ukrainian SSR with workers' collectives of people's democracies)." Digest of articles. Kyiv. 1962, etc.
66 V. Korionov, N. Yakovlev. The USSR and the USA must live in peace. Soviet-American relations: past and present. M. 1961; R. Gorbunov. Soviet-American trade relations. M. 1961.
67 R. Karpova. L. B. Krasin. Soviet diplomat. M. 1962.
based largely on unpublished documents from the archives of the People's Commissariat for Foreign Trade. This made it possible not only to talk vividly about the diplomatic activities of L. B. Krasin himself, but also to acquaint the general reader with many interesting details of the work of those conferences in which he participated, the pathetic and trade negotiations that he conducted on behalf of the Soviet government in Berlin , Tartu and Stockholm, Moscow, London and Paris, at the Genoa and Hague conferences as the head or member of the Soviet delegation. Another book about the same figure in Soviet foreign policy is less successful. Its author used only published materials 68. Book by S. A. Zakharov , despite its small volume, helps to recreate the bright image of the tragically deceased diplomat of the Lenin school P. L. Voikov 69. Brief biographical sketches have been published about another prominent Soviet diplomat, who also died at a combat post - V. V. Vorovsky 70; published biography of one of the first People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs, N. G. Markin 71. The publication of biographical works that has begun raises the question of creating a series of books (perhaps first a collection of essays) about prominent Soviet diplomatic workers. Apparently, it would be advisable to also publish a special series of brochures on key, most pressing issues in the history of international politics of the USSR.
Noting the undoubted positive changes in the publication of popular scientific literature about the foreign policy of the USSR, I would like to draw attention to the shortcomings in this important matter. A number of authors are faced with a not new question about the style of presentation: in some brochures the material is presented dryly, inexpressively, and lacks bright, memorable facts. Not all is well with the theme. Let us point out here the insufficient attention to such issues as the new type of international political relations that have developed in the socialist camp, connections between Soviet and progressive foreign socio-political organizations, international cultural cooperation of the USSR, relations of the Soviet Union with small European countries, with the states of Latin America.
Achievements in the study of Soviet foreign policy are undeniable in both quantitative and qualitative terms. The years 1961 - 1963 were marked by an intensification of publishing work on this problem and an improvement in the documentary base of research, greater attention to the events of the last decade and positive changes in scientific popularization work. Interest in international political issues has increased significantly. The circle of international historians is expanding. Recently, the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences created a special Scientific Council on problems of foreign policy and international relations, which will unite scientific forces and coordinate research activities throughout the country. The first session of the council aroused great interest in the scientific community 72 . Now, when Lenin’s policy of peaceful coexistence plays a crucial role in the struggle to preserve and strengthen peace, when this policy is believed and supported by hundreds of millions of people on all continents, the scope of both research and popularization work should undoubtedly increase. The post-war period cannot but come to the fore in this work.
71 N. F. Vargin. Commissioner of the Volga Flotilla. M. 1962.
72 For more information about the session, see: “Questions of History”, 1964, No. 3.
comes from the words “new stage” 73 , But when this stage began and what are its qualitative features, the author does not bring the necessary clarity to these questions. One cannot completely agree with the periodization proposed by the authors of the above-mentioned book on the international socialist division of labor. They date the first stage to the war years - the time when the Soviet Union supplied raw materials, fuel, and food to those countries that were liberated from fascist occupation. In our opinion, then we were talking about the provision of emergency assistance, which in most cases was not immediately compensated, and often was completely free of charge, and it is hardly possible to talk here about some kind of division of labor. The periodization of further stages does not sufficiently take into account socio-political changes in people's democracies. It seems to us that the time has come, based on the work already done, to explore in monographic terms the history of relations between the USSR and individual socialist countries. This applies, in particular, to Soviet-Cuban relations 74. Among more general topics, a book about the activities of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, which recently celebrated its 15th anniversary, would be greeted with interest. In studying the history of relations of the Soviet Union with the countries of the East and Latin America, it also seems advisable to pay more attention to the monographic development of political and diplomatic problems, as well as the relations of the USSR with individual states. The same applies to the history of relations between the Soviet Union and capitalist states. The role of the USSR in the history of the creation and activities of the United Nations needs a monographic study.
Historians working in the fields of foreign policy and international relations are at the forefront of the ideological struggle. This struggle, as emphasized by the June (1963) Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, is extremely acute. One of the forms of ideological sabotage that has become more frequent in recent years is the distortion of the peace-loving foreign policy of the USSR and other socialist countries. The duty of Soviet scientists is to give their work on the history of foreign policy a combative, offensive character. Recently, attention to criticism of bourgeois historiography on these issues has increased significantly. This is evidenced, in particular, by the general meeting of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences, held on May 21, 1963, at which the report by V. G. Trukhanovsky “The Principle of Peaceful Coexistence and its Bourgeois Critics” 75 was discussed. And the report and speeches of academicians E. M. Zhukov, I. M. Maisky, I. I. Mints, M. V. Nechkina, B. A. Rybakov, member. - corr. USSR Academy of Sciences V. M. Khvostov testified to the close attention of Soviet scientists to the current and acute demands of the modern ideological struggle.
In piles on the history of foreign policy, more and more attention is paid to the fight against falsifiers of history. Thus, the book edited by A. A. Gromyko provides a detailed critique of the views of opponents of peaceful coexistence. The two-volume book, edited by V. G. Trukhanovsky, contains a review of the main Soviet and foreign sources, including publications in oriental languages, and a critical assessment of the main directions of bourgeois historiography. M. E. Airapetyan and G. A. Deborin in their work criticize foreign falsifications for each of the periods of Soviet foreign policy they consider. Such detailed criticism is also given in a number of special historiographical works 76 . But the most convincing answer to the bourgeois
73 I. V. Dudinsky. A new stage in the development of economic and political relations between the countries of the world socialist system. "New and Contemporary History", 1963, No. 3.
74 It should be noted that a collection of materials on this issue was published: “The peoples of the USSR and Cuba are forever together.” Documents of Soviet-Cuban friendship. M. 1963.
75 See "Questions of History", 1963, No. 7.
76 See "Foreign literature about the October Revolution." M. 1961; "Criticism of the latest bourgeois historiography." "Proceedings" of the Leningrad branch of the Institute of History. Vol. 3. M. -L. 1961; E. B. Chernyak. Historiography versus history. M. 1962, etc. Scientists from the Union republics are actively involved in the fight against falsifiers of history. See G. A. Galoyan. Socialist revolution in Transcaucasia in the light of bourgeois historiography. M. 1960; K. N. Novoselov. Against bourgeois falsifiers of the history of Central Asia. Ashgabat. 1962; Kh. Sh. Inoyatov. A response to falsifiers of the history of Soviet Central Asia and Kazakhstan. Tashkent. 1962. Books by K. N. Novoselov and Kh. Sh. Inoyatov are reviewed in the review by V. M. Ustinov. See "Questions of History", 1963, No. 9.
The publication of deep and comprehensive studies about the general line of Soviet foreign policy will be a significant falsification. Life requires the development of various specific aspects of this problem, for example, such as the policy of peaceful coexistence between states and ideological struggle; peaceful coexistence and contradictions between imperialist countries; cooperation between countries with different social systems and class struggle; peaceful coexistence and national liberation movement. It also seems necessary to further study, especially in relation to the post-war period, the question of two tendencies in the relation of the capitalist world to the Soviet Union, of favorable factors that objectively facilitate coexistence between “them.”
Search for materials from the publisher in the systems: Libmonster (the whole world). Google. Yandex
Permanent link for scientific papers (for citation):
A. E. IOFFE, THE LATEST SOVIET LITERATURE ON THE HISTORY OF FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR (1961-1963. Date of update: 05/28/2016. URL: https://site/m/articles/view/NEWEST-SOVIET-LITERATURE-by- HISTORY OF FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR 1961-1963 (date of access: 08/22/2019).The foreign policy activities of the Soviet state in the second half of the 40s took place in an atmosphere of profound changes in the international arena. Victory in the Patriotic War increased the authority of the USSR. In 1945, it had diplomatic relations with 52 states (compared to 26 in the pre-war years). The Soviet Union took an active part in resolving the most important international issues, and above all in resolving the post-war situation in Europe.
In seven countries of Central and Eastern Europe, leftist, democratic forces came to power. The new governments created in them were headed by representatives of the communist and workers' parties. Leaders of Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania. Poland, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia carried out agrarian reforms in their countries, nationalization of large industry, banks and transport. The established political organization of society was called people's democracy. It was seen as one of the forms of proletarian dictatorship.
In 1947, at a meeting of representatives of nine communist parties of Eastern European countries, the Communist Information Bureau (Cominformburo) was created. He was entrusted with coordinating the actions of the communist parties of the people's democracies, which began to call themselves socialist. The documents of the meeting formulated the thesis about dividing the world into two camps - imperialist and democratic, anti-imperialist. The concept of two camps, of confrontation on the world stage between two social systems lay at the heart of the foreign policy views of the party and state leadership of the USSR. These views were reflected, in particular, in the work of I.V. Stalin “Economic problems of socialism in the USSR.” The work also contained the conclusion about the inevitability of wars in the world as long as imperialism exists.
Treaties of friendship and mutual assistance were concluded between the USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe. Identical treaties linked the Soviet Union with the GDR, created on the territory of East Germany, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the People's Republic of China (PRC). The agreement with China provided for a loan of $300 million. The right of the USSR and China to use the former CER was confirmed. The countries reached an agreement on joint actions in the event of aggression by any of the states. Diplomatic relations were established with states that gained independence as a result of the national liberation struggle that unfolded in them (the so-called developing countries).
Beginning of the Cold War
With the end of the Patriotic War, changes occurred in the relationship of the USSR with its former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition. “Cold War” - this is the name given to the foreign policy pursued by both sides towards each other during the second half of the 40s - the early 90s. It was characterized primarily by hostile political actions of the parties. Forceful methods were used to solve international problems. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the USSR in the initial period of the Cold War were V. M. Molotov, and since 1949 - A. Ya. Vyshinsky.
The confrontation between the parties clearly manifested itself in 1947 in connection with the Marshall Plan put forward by the United States. The program developed by US Secretary of State J. Marshall provided for the provision of economic assistance to European countries that suffered during the Second World War. The USSR and people's democracies were invited to participate in a conference on this matter. The Soviet government regarded the Marshall Plan as a weapon of anti-Soviet policy and refused to participate in the conference. At his insistence, the countries of Eastern Europe invited to the conference also announced their refusal to participate in the Marshall Plan.
One of the forms of manifestation of the Cold War was the formation of political and military-political blocs. In 1949, the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) was created. It included the USA, Canada and several Western European countries. Two years later, the military-political alliance between the United States, Australia and New Zealand (ANZUS) was signed. The formation of these blocs contributed to the strengthening of the US position in different regions of the world.
In the context of intensifying confrontation in relations between former allies, the Soviet Union worked against the propaganda of a new war. The main arena of his activities was the United Nations (UN). This international organization was created in 1945. It united 51 states. Its goal was to strengthen peace and security and develop cooperation between states. At UN sessions, Soviet representatives made proposals to reduce conventional weapons and ban atomic weapons, and to withdraw foreign troops from the territories of foreign states. All these proposals, as a rule, were blocked by US representatives and their allies. The USSR unilaterally withdrew troops from the territories of several states where they had been deployed during the war years.
Representatives of Soviet public organizations actively participated in the peace movement, which took shape organizationally in the late 40s. More than 115 million citizens of the country signed the Stockholm Appeal adopted by the Standing Committee of the World Peace Congress (1950). It contained demands for the prohibition of atomic weapons and the establishment of international control over the implementation of this decision.
The confrontation between the former allies reached its greatest intensity at the turn of the 40s and 50s in connection with the Korean War. In 1950, the leadership of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea made an attempt to unite the two Korean states under its leadership. According to Soviet leaders, this association could strengthen the position of the anti-imperialist camp in this region of Asia. During the preparation for the war and during hostilities, the USSR government provided financial, military and technical assistance to North Korea. The PRC leadership, at the insistence of I.V. Stalin, sent several military divisions to North Korea to participate in combat operations. The war was ended only in 1953 after lengthy diplomatic negotiations.
USSR and Eastern European countries
One of the leading directions of foreign policy in the post-war years was the establishment of friendly relations with the states of Eastern Europe. Soviet diplomacy provided assistance to Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania in the preparation of peace treaties with them (signed in Paris in 1947). In accordance with trade agreements, the Soviet Union supplied grain, raw materials for industry, and fertilizers for agriculture to Eastern European countries on preferential terms. In 1949, in order to expand economic cooperation and trade between countries, an intergovernmental economic organization was created - the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). It included Albania (until 1961), Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, and since 1949 the GDR. The seat of the CMEA Secretariat was Moscow. One of the reasons for the creation of CMEA was the boycott by Western countries of trade relations with the USSR and the states of Eastern Europe.
The main directions of relations between the USSR and Eastern European countries were determined by bilateral agreements between them. Military and other types of assistance were provided in the event that one of the parties became involved in hostilities. It was planned to develop economic and cultural ties and hold conferences on international issues affecting the interests of the contracting parties.
Already at the initial stage of cooperation between the USSR and the states of Eastern Europe, contradictions and conflicts appeared in their relations. They were mainly associated with the search and choice of the path to building socialism in these states. According to the leaders of some countries, in particular W. Gomulka (Poland) and K. Gottwald (Czechoslovakia), the Soviet path of development was not the only one for building socialism. The desire of the USSR leadership to establish the Soviet model of building socialism and to unify ideological and political concepts led to the Soviet-Yugoslav conflict. The reason for it was Yugoslavia’s refusal to participate in the federation with Bolshaya recommended by the Soviet leaders. In addition, the Yugoslav side refused to fulfill the terms of the agreement on mandatory consultations with the USSR on issues of national foreign policy. Yugoslav leaders were accused of retreating from joint actions with socialist countries. In August 1949, the USSR broke off diplomatic relations with Yugoslavia.
The results of the USSR's foreign policy activities in the second half of the 40s and early 50s were contradictory. Its position in the international arena has strengthened. At the same time, the policy of confrontation between East and West significantly contributed to the growth of tension in the world.
Difficulties in the economic sphere, ideologization of socio-political life, increased international tension - these were the results of the development of society in the first post-war years. During this period, the regime of personal power of I.V. Stalin became even stronger, and the command and administrative system became more stringent. During these same years, the idea of the need for change in society became more and more clearly formed in the public consciousness. The death of J.V. Stalin (March 1953) facilitated the search for a way out of the contradictions that entangled all spheres of public life.
