60-80s it is a period of "confrontational stability".
"Long Peace" - until the 80s and from the 80s - "New HV": this is how Amer. historians. But without one period, one cannot understand the other.
HV continued, but in a relaxed version. Classic cold war - refusal to negotiate. Softened version - both sides go to negotiations:
1. It was possible to reach important agreements between the 2 systems at this particular time. The 1970s is a period of "détente". These include the limitation of strategic arms and issues of European security. We even agreed to develop economic ties between East and West. After the Caribbean crisis, there were no head-on clashes between 2 powers, but there were regional clashes.
2. But the Cold War continued. Firstly, the ideological war continued, periodically there were tensions in relations. In 1983, Reagan called the USSR an "evil empire." The ideological conflict remained. Secondly, the arms race remained and continued. The peak of spending on armaments was 1987. Thirdly. There were no head-on collisions, and the political and military struggle switched to the third world. Regional conflicts continued to be seen in the conflict between capitalism and socialism.
And the last example of confrontation is the limited role of the UN. Veto. The USSR imposed it when, in its opinion, the outcome is possible in favor of the West. And vice versa.
From 1946 to 1990, only 2 states were called peace breakers - aggressors. These are the DPRK (resolution No. 82) and Argentina (the Falklands crisis of 1982). Non-military sanctions were applied only twice: against Southern Rhodesia and South Africa, and that's it! Although over these 45 years they counted 80 wars and more than 300 military conflicts.
Distribution of forces.
The balance of power between the 2 systems is in 1st place here.
This refers to the correlation of forces in the sphere of 1) economics, 2) social, 3) military, 4) political.
1) Economy.
It is impossible to characterize unambiguously. Major advantages of socialism at the beginning of the period and a serious lag behind the West at the end of this period.
3 periods. 2 of them are short - a period of stagnation, reflected in the balance of power. For the first time in the competition of 2 systems in growth rates, capitalism began to overtake socialism.
1951-1980 1981-85 1986-90
GDP and OECD Growth Rates
7 4 2.5 (Socialist countries)
4 3 3.5 (OECD)
The share of socialist countries in world GDP.
A loss of 2% in the 80s is very serious - this is stagnation.
The level of labor productivity in the industry in the socialist countries.
1938 - did not exceed 10%
The West not only equalized the indicators, but also began to surpass socialism.
Agriculture.
Labor productivity in agriculture in the USSR was 20% of that of the United States. Grain purchases began: in 1965 - for 2.3 billion rubles, in 1985 - for 23 billion rubles.
The USSR in 1980 had 4 times more tractors than the USA. And grain production - 200 (USSR) and 300 (USA) million tons.
In economy sphere the main point is qualitative growth. The West has entered the era of post-industrial society. The USSR continued to develop at the stage of an industrial society. The USSR could not respond to the qualitative growth. Wrong econ. strategy since Khrushchev. Gorbachev tried to equalize. "Acceleration" and "Perestroika", for which he is loved in the West. These 2 things contradict each other. "Acceleration" - due to heavy industry, and "Perestroika" - due to intensification.
The most serious challenge for the West was in the field of science-intensive products, in the field of using the results of scientific and technological revolution. And this was not just a lag.
1980s. The growth of knowledge-intensive industries.
Zap. Europe - 5% per year, USA - 7% per year, Japan - 14%. USSR - 0.4%
Computer Engineering.
USA per year - 28-30%
USSR - 1.3%.
Software.
USA per year - 35%
USSR - 1.8%
The transition to a post-industrial society - attention is paid not to the quantity, but to the quality of products.
Percentage of marriage in the late 80s.
England - 8%
Japan - 1.2%
USSR - one witty economist suggested: 16% of products received a quality mark. The rest - in the West would be considered a marriage.
This is the main area where the lag manifested itself.
Socialism and capitalism were in the 80s at different stages of development. Socialism was at the industrial stage, and capitalism entered the post-industrial stage. Socialism proved its advantages in the era of extensive development, and capitalism - in the era of intensive development.
Who is to blame - the social system itself, which turned out to be flawed, or watered. course, wrong strategy?
Both, but mostly the latter. Indirect evidence: 1) in a number the latest technologies(military sphere and space) it was not the USSR that lagged behind. Every year, the USSR launched hundreds of satellites and rockets, and the USA - about 20. 2) There were attempts to modernize socialism since the 60s (Kosygin's reforms were curtailed). The political elite of the USSR understood that it was necessary to modernize the USSR, but failed, and to a greater extent because of the watered. guides.
2) Social sphere.
Socialism has always been proud of this sphere and has been ahead of capitalism. Socialism was proud of the fact that the care of a person was legalized. The Stalinist constitution was the most democratic - for the first time in history, economics were drawn up. human rights, free medical care, free education. There has been no unemployment in the USSR since 1930.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the West began to catch up and even surpass socialism. And this is extremely important, because this is the power of example. Human welfare is the slogan in both countries. It was at this time that the concept of “quality of life” was developed at the UN, which included hundreds of indicators.
Social structure by the 80s.
The social structure of society was the same as it was in the 50s in the West. The main productive force is the same - the factory proletariat. In the West, the decisive force is the middle class. It was not in the USSR. Blue-collar workers - the factory proletariat - in the West there were less than 20% of them, in the USA - less than 15%. Leading role in social development was played by white-collar workers - persons employed in the service sector. And their social the position was much higher than that of factory workers.
social spending.
In the 50s, the USSR was proud that they were 2-3 times higher than those of the West. And then the state share. spending on social needs remained unchanged - 15-16%. In the 80s in the West - about 30%.
national income.
In the USSR, during these years, the salary was in ND - 37%. That is, 37% of the country's national income went to salaries. In the West - 65% - salary, and 35% - profit. Who will rise to the revolution for the sake of 35%. But for the sake of 63% - still think.
In 1987-88, the average salary in the United States was $1,700; in the USSR, the average salary was 201 rubles, with benefits - 287 rubles. And the dollar was approximately equal to the ruble.
Average life expectancy.
The USSR - 69 years, Japan - 78. According to this indicator, the USSR ranked 51st, now it is even worse. Russia - 65, Japan - 62.5.
Medical care.
In the USSR, free in many ways was better than paid now.
1987 - The Soviet press trumpeted to the whole world that 122 heart surgeries had been done. In the US that year, 140,000.
Education.
In the 80s, Soviet universities had the latest equipment for 1,200 rubles per student, and Moscow State University - 12,000. If you take all Western universities, then they have an average of $ 80,000.
In terms of the number of students and graduate students per capita in the 50-60s, the USSR ranked 3rd in the world, in the 80s - 50s
3) Military sphere.
It was in this sphere that the USSR achieved its greatest success. All R. In the 1980s, it reached parity. This means that the lag in some classes of weapons was compensated by the fact that there was an advantage in other classes of weapons.
The balance of power changed 27 times, in 23 cases the USSR had to catch up, in 1 there was equality, and in 3 cases the USSR initially had an advantage.
3 cases - 1. First portable bomb. 2. The first ICBM. 3. The first missile defense system.
Eisenhower recognized the ratio of nuclear forces 1 to 12. Kennedy recognized 1 to 5. And Nixon - 1 to 1.
In some, non-nuclear areas, we had an advantage.
By the beginning of the 80s, the USSR had 301 gas turbine ships, and in the West - only 2 (1 in England, 1 in Japan). When in 1971 the Rep. Bangladesh, the 7th American fleet was sent there to the coast of India (always a little, it is sent). The path of the 7th fleet was 1.5 times shorter, but Admiral Sysoev and the squadron sailed there earlier. The Americans were forced to signal "Glad to welcome the Soviet fleet." Sysoev replied: "I am glad to welcome the American fleet away from the shores of free India."
4 categories of nuclear weapons carriers: tactical (560 km), operational-tactical (560-1000 km), medium-range (1000-5000), strategic (from 5500 - the distance from Moscow to Washington).
The USA surpassed the USSR in the medium and shorter range class, they wrote for a long time. In 1987, the INF Treaty was signed. All missiles were reduced according to it: the USA - 859, the USSR - 1852.
Strategic. The triad of carriers - ICBMs, SLBMs (Bal. rocket on submarines), TB (heavy bombers). By the end of the 80s, 2494 from the USSR, 2260 from the USA.
For nuclear weapons. USA - 16,000 and USSR - 10,000 (by the end of the 80s). During this period, the United States overtook the USSR on RBCh (missile with multiple warheads): USA - 1351, USSR - 1272.
Navy. The US boasted about this. Aircraft carriers - 15 to 2, destroyers and cruisers with nuclear weapons 110 to 80, submarines with nuclear weapons 75 - the USA, 265 - the USSR.
The balance of forces of the ATS and NATO. Combat divisions 107 and 101, tanks 52,000 to 22,000, artillery 46,500 to 13,700.
parity results.
1) The USSR in the 70-80s demonstrated a huge military potential.
2) The achievement of parity contributed to the strengthening of international stability.
3) There is no doubt that the achievement of parity has become the material basis for the policy of detente.
4) The significance of achieving parity is the depletion of the forces of the USSR, the undermining of foreign policy resources. Kennan turned out to be right in his time when by the arms race he meant, first of all, the exhaustion of the USSR. He was still alive, lived 102 years.
Funds for parity were withdrawn from the civilian economy, the social sphere, and education. In addition, unequal trade with socialist countries + support for countries of social orientation + war in Afghanistan.
In 2/2 of the 80s, US spending on weapons was 300 billion, and the entire ND was 550-600 billion rubles. It was necessary to spend the same amount, and what was left for other areas.
In this sense, the achievement of parity led to a weakening of the positions of the socialist camp.
4) Political sphere.
The development of all other spheres depended on it.
General character. In the West, politics turned out to be wiser - it corresponded to objective conditions.
1. Development of foreign policy concepts.
John F Kennedy's team in the 60s - the concept of "flexible response". For the first time, the equal vulnerability of the USSR and the USA was recognized.
What is the Doctrine of Rejection? This is the doctrine of unlimited escalation, the active use of even nuclear weapons.
Instead of unlimited escalation, then they began to talk about controlled escalation. Those. it is the use of various methods of influencing socialism. There was no talk of any love cooperation even within the framework of the doctrine of flexible response, the struggle against socialism continued.
Robert McNamara, Kennedy's secretary of defense, proposed guerrilla warfare.
Lyndon Johnson has already talked about bridging tactics. This is an ideological penetration into the East. Through cultural organizations, radio programs such as the BBC and the Voice of America. Did you listen? Listened. The USSR and the socialist countries lagged behind here. There is nothing wrong with jazz. If Medvedev communicates with Pink Floyd, then it is clear what he did earlier.
But here we are talking about a wise change in US policy - a differentiated approach to socialist countries. The United States provided serious financial assistance on the eve of 1956 - Hungary, 1968 - Czechoslovakia, 70s - Poland. And they achieved the goal - the erosion of ideological foundations.
A little later, in the 1970s, a foundation was created to support democracy in Eastern Europe, and then in the USSR. He spent $ 30 billion a year, providing assistance, incl. and personnel, the opposition of Eastern European countries.
But at the same time, the confrontation continued. It was transferred to another plane, the plane of economic and technical competition, in the sphere of ideology and economics. Here the US could win.
On the other hand, active economic pressure on the USSR. Jackson-Wennig Amendment (1974): do not grant "most favored nation treatment" to those countries that violate human rights, primarily the right to travel abroad (for example, the rights of Jews). This "non-provision" hit me hard. Now it is sometimes suspended, but for Russia it has not been canceled. Although it has long been canceled for Ukraine, Georgia, but not for the Russian Federation.
Unexpectedly for polit. elites of the USSR, the USA moved to tougher policy in Rel. THE USSR. "The Doctrine of Neo-Globalism (Reagan Doctrine)": "The United States renounces self-restraint in foreign policy and will give an immediate rebuff to the spread of communism anywhere in the world." In our literature, this concept was portrayed as a return to the times of the classical 19th century: direct military pressure, an arms race. Phraseology - yes, but this new challenge from the US was thrown by the USSR in the new conditions: Reagan counted on 1) the weakness of the USSR civil economy 2) on the erosion of the ideological foundations of the Eastern European countries. The Americans felt that it was possible to switch again to leverage.
The Americans are right: the USSR at that time switched to a defensive strategy. The turn of the 70-80s: the USSR abandoned the concept of self-destruction of capitalism: 1) in fact, capitalism became different, it was a mixed society. Therefore, the Stalinist-Leninist formulations did not work 2) Capitalism began to overtake socialism 3) The leaders of a number of Western communist parties took the position of "Eurosocialism" and did not agree with the course of the USSR. "New Thinking" (1986, 27th Party Congress), and announced this to the world in 1988 at the UN Congress. And he wrote a book with the immodest title "New political thinking for our country and for the whole world":
1 thesis, for this he was praised in the West and in our country - "the priority of universal human interests and values over class ones." There is nothing wrong here, Gorbachev wrote it off from the West. From the point of view of the Defense Ministry, this was a transition to defensive tactics - this is the thesis of "de-ideologization" (this is what the West has been striving for since the 60s). Even at the XX Congress there were 3 principles: watered. dialogue, economy cooperation and uncompromising ideological struggle. And Gorbachev left only the first 2 theses for peaceful coexistence. In the West, this theory was called "the ideological disarmament of the USSR."
Hence other theses as a practical direction in external. half of the USSR - 2. normalization of relations with the United States, 3. concessions on the German issue, 4. "restructuring of relations with socialist countries, subject to the implementation of Gorbachev's reforms there." 5. Recognition of human rights.
The significance of these reforms: 1) New watered. thinking really contributed to the détente of the MO. 2) It really contributed to the collapse of the social system, and then the collapse of the USSR. Indirect evidence - in 1999 in Turkey at the American University, he said: "the main goal of his whole life was the destruction of communism." It is amazing. This is clear evidence in favor of a change in the balance of power in favor of capitalism.
2. Intra-system relations - centrifugal or centripetal tendencies.
This is extremely important, also an indicator of the collapse of socialism.
West - the same tendencies, but intensified: 1) the predominance of centripetal forces over centrifugal, both in economic and political relations. Development of transnational corporations, European integration. The predominance was reflected in the history of NATO.
During this period, he faced serious difficulties, but this union not only survived, but also strengthened its position.
1) In 1962, a very heated discussion in the West about the creation of a multilateral nuclear force (Kim Rusk, US Secretary of State, outlined at a meeting of the NATO Council): in practice, it could mean that the FRG was gaining access to the nuclear button; Britain and France handed over their nuclear forces to the Americans. It was a crisis. For De Gaulle, this was completely unacceptable (in 1960 they detonated a bomb). Macmillan met with Kennedy (they agree to the proposal, but the British nuclear forces can come under the control of Parliament when it sees fit). In the same 1966, De Gaulle announced his withdrawal from NATO. But this was not the end of NATO, as our literature wrote - France, having left the military organization, did not leave the political one. De Gaulle supported Kennedy during the Caribbean crisis, and on a number of other issues.
2) Not accepting the proposal on multilateral nuclear forces, all other proposals were accepted. Early 80s - about the deployment of 572 Pershing-2 cruise missiles in Western Europe. There was a "problem of 6 minutes" - a rocket launched from the USSR to the USA flies for half an hour. And these rockets - 6 minutes. Those. it was no longer easy to prepare for their destruction, despite the missile defense.
NATO is expanding. By the time of the collapse of the USSR - 19 countries; 5th NATO enlargement (2009) - 28 countries.
1966 - the formation of the World Anti-Communist League. And there was no corresponding socialist organization. And it was a serious League, 98 countries of the world participated, newspapers and radio were printed.
1967 - Creation of the OECD (organization of economic cooperation and development). All entered the developed countries– 24 (19 Western European, USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand). They do not write about it, but meetings and sessions were held annually: a unified policy in the field of ek-ki was discussed, 10-year plans were adopted. After the oil shock of 1973, a unified energy program was adopted: to limit the consumption of oil and gas and to develop the development of new energy sources.
1973 - the Trilateral Commission was created with the money of Rockefeller and the owner of Fiat Agnelli: 3 centers of power (USA, Japan, Western Europe): first director - Zbigniew Brzezinski. It is an informal body for the training of senior leaders. They recruited and trained young people, many politicians came out of there. The scheme worked great. Chirac, for example, went through the commission. People listened to lectures, although you won't turn out to be Shiraks. Conducted seminars. There was, of course, the Institute of Marxism-Leninism, but this is a religious organization. There was no purposeful body for the training of managers in the socialist camp.
Since 1975, meetings of the "7" - the leading Western powers and Japan - have been held annually. Population - 12%, share in world GDP - 52%.
1989 - adoption at the meeting of the Political Declaration: on the need to support reforms in the Eastern European socialist countries; about assistance to Hungary and Poland; about writing off debts to countries of the 3rd world, about strengthening the dollar.
The most striking indicator of centripetal forces is Western European integration. several stages.
Stage 1 (1951-1957) - preparatory. Prologue - 1951 - the creation of the European Coal and Steel Association according to the plan of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of France Schuman. Since 1953, the ECSC has been functioning, it is the basis of the common market.
Stage 2 (1957-1968). March 25, 1957 - Treaty of Rome, 6 countries. In fact, this year marks the formation of the European Economic Community (EEC). Soviet political scientists and the press laughed. Goals of the organization: a) creation of a common market - a single trade space, a single trade area of 6 countries. To do this, we need to reduce and reduce customs duties to 0 for 12 years. It provided for a unified economic policy for 12 countries. In fact, the decision was revolutionary, such associations have never existed in the world.
Stage 3 (since the end of the 60s): unification of the UES, ECSC, Euratom. The EU appeared (without the "e") and one body. They announced that a single trade zone and a common tariff have been introduced. The main thing is that in 12 years they planned to create and created.
Then the EU began to expand. In the 1960s, Great Britain really wanted to join. De Gaulle did not let him in (England would join, but while maintaining special relations in the British Commonwealth of Nations +, she was categorically against the creation of a single political union with the leader - France). The United States asked very much for England. This irritated De Gaulle, so he called England in the EU " Trojan horse". In 1973, De Gaulle resigned - England was accepted, along with it - Denmark, Ireland, Norway (but the referendum was refused).
In the 1970s there was a debate, what should be the community as a political body? There were 2 points of view. And this conflict was bright and visible in the 1970s. There were supporters of the federation, ie. the allocation of supranational bodies that would govern the entire community, regardless of national bodies. France and the small countries were especially active in this, because in a federation the small countries would play a more active role.
Two other powerful powers - the Federal Republic of Germany and Great Britain - were in favor of a confederation, for the unification of independent states. The main governing bodies would remain national.
The debate went on for about 10 years, even more. But it is important that in the 1970s working bodies were created - Council of Ministers(min ek-ki and MFA); Commission of the European Communities(expert assessments, control over contracts, over the council of ministers); European Parliament.
An even more serious role is played by the European Community Conference, which still exists today. Representatives of each country were included there according to the principle of competence. Well, there was no such thing in the socialist camp. But no more than 2 people from each country. These people controlled the implementation of decisions.
European Parliament. Until 1979 there were no direct party elections, just each country delegated a certain number of deputies.
1972 - At the Paris meeting of the leaders of the European Community, Georges Pompidou, President of France, proposed measures to transform the EEC into a political union.
1974 on the initiative of France, the European Council was created. It replaced regular or irregular summits by becoming a regular body that included heads of state and government. In fact, it did not depend on the decisions of national governments, it was, as it were, above the EU, but at the same time it was a key instrument in determining its policy.
1976 - discussion of the report of the Belgian Prime Minister Tindemans (1966 was instructed to develop ideas further development). He supported the idea of transforming the European Union into the European Community. He proposed to form a 4th component (there were 3 bodies) of the union - European political cooperation - that is, to deal not only with the economy, but also develop a common foreign policy. That would be the first step towards political unification in the EU.
At the same time, the integration processes continued. 1970s - 1/2 of the 1980s - in fact, not just a single market, but a single economic space was created.
4 stage of integration (1985-1992)
1985 - The Single European Act is adopted in Luxembourg. The main results of the economic development of the European community were summed up.
1) The “4th Pillar” was legalized - European political cooperation: the European Council, which was not previously a permanent body, was legalized. 2) Strengthened the powers of all central, supranational bodies - the Council of Ministers, the Commission of the European Communities and the European Parliament. They were elected on party lists. 3) The next steps were outlined - the formation of the European Union (scheduled for 1992), coordination in the monetary sphere.
1990 in Schengen (a castle in Luxembourg) an agreement was signed. We opened borders for each other (6 countries initially). It was an important ideological and psychological moment.
1992 in Maastricht (Netherlands) the formation of the European Union was announced. Those. All plans and programs were carried out and completed on time. It was discussed in 10 years to create a new European currency (2002 - created).
These are all proofs of the predominance of centripetal forces.
By the end of the 1980s, world capitalism came as a single entity. This strengthened the position of the West in its competition/struggle with the East.
Socialism.
Centrifugal countries prevailed over centripetal countries. Despite fraternal assistance, a planned economy and a planned solution of all issues.
1) Forgetting by the Soviet elite that the socialist camp included countries of the same type (“people's democracy”), but far from the same. There were various national interests and traditions.
2) In the unification of these countries, the main method was the method of planting a model from the USSR (Stalinist, neo-Stalinist, Gorbachev).
3) Policy inconsistency. Gorbachev offered what he initially denied: reforms, decentralization, capitalist elements. And especially when he announced the unprofitability of maintaining a zone of influence in Eastern Europe.
4) Influence of the West.
a. Direct: differentiation of relationships, economic assistance. Not just forceful pressure on the entire camp, but work with each individual country. Americans in the 1960s began to support the demand of Albania, a communist hermit, to create an ethnically pure Kosovo. The United States supported Enver Hoxha without even having diplomatic relations with Albania.
b. Indirect: the power of example - in the 1950s the USSR had a positive power of example, since the 60s it has become largely negative due to lagging behind the West, except for military power).
The processes were gradual.
Economy.
There were also successes in the development of centripetal forces.
For the first time, such a form of economic cooperation as the coordination of national economic plans began to prevail. Previously, everyone adopted five-year plans, but did not coordinate them, and everyone, following the example of the USSR, tried to develop industries for which there were no conditions, and no need either. And then they began to listen to each other. The center of gravity of economic cooperation was shifted from the sphere of trade to the sphere of production. Another indicator is the creation of joint ventures. Mir energy system, Druzhba oil pipeline, Soyuz gas pipeline. The main goal is in the field of economics. ties - the creation of socialist economic integration. The goal is correct, but it didn't happen. And this is evidence of the predominance of centrifugal forces over centripetal:
1) Economy integration was built on the basis of extensive development. The program on scientific and technological progress was adopted only in 1985, on the eve of the collapse of the social system (in Europe - since 1957 => it was too late).
2) Economy. cooperation was based primarily on the economy. help from the USSR. 600 enterprises were built free of charge in Europe, 800 in Asia and Cuba. In addition, energy resources are actually free. What did it lead to? Well, the USSR was relatively loved, but its forces were depleted.
By the end of the 1980s, it became obvious, although theoretically it could not be, that socialist integration lags behind capitalist. Within the framework of the CMEA, it was not possible to achieve elementary things - a single trade zone, duty-free space. And in the West, this was more difficult to achieve, because. private property and interests. So it was not possible to implement the program of scientific and technological progress. The socialist countries began to abandon the division of labor proposed by the CMEA bodies. Ceausescu was offered to supply potatoes and vegetables, he replied that he was not going to turn Romania into a garden of the socialist camp.
Political sphere.
Successes in the development of centripetal forces amounted to strengthening the positions of the Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Pact. A number of changes in the organizational structure of the PKK - in 1969 a committee of defense ministers was created, in 1972 a committee of ministers of foreign affairs. Major initiatives, such as the creation of a European security system, were initiated by the PKK.
But here, too, there are centrifugal forces.
Soviet-Chinese relations are the most striking example.
They escalated in the 2/2 50s - early. 60s. And at this stage, it is conditionally possible to distinguish 3 periods: 1960, 1970, 1980s.
2 main areas of controversy:
1) The field of ideology and theory.
Several contentious issues. The main ones are the ways of building socialism, the attitude towards the cult of personality, the problem of exporting the revolution.
Ways of building socialism.
In the USSR, in the CIS - reforms. China called it all revisionism and a departure from Marxism-Leninism. And in China, the economy has also changed. well. Before that, there was a "great leap". In the 60s: "the final victory of socialism is possible in 5-10 generations or even after a longer period." We switched to the evolutionary path, but by administrative and economic methods.
attitude towards the cult of personality.
In the 60s in all socialist. countries - the cult of personality.
Since 1956 (XX Congress): exposure of the cult. This was welcomed in Eastern European countries.
In China, after the death of Mao, they came up with the formula "3 and 7". 3 Mao mistakes, 7 correct decisions. Those. they approached very wisely and carefully.
In China, the 22nd Congress was called revisionist, and for the first time a delegation was not sent to the 23rd Congress at all.
2) The sphere of interstate relationships.
Foreign policy concepts were different.
In the USSR they spoke loudly and often about peaceful coexistence. And indeed there was a series of initiatives.
In China: the creation of a unified anti-imperialist. front. Received distribution. 3 worlds theory. 1 - two superpowers with a hegemonic policy, 2 - medium and underdeveloped countries. 3 - the "third world" is the main revolutionary force that China should lead, i.e. fight for the establishment of socialism with the help of national liberation movements (NOD).
"Theory of 3 A": Asia, Africa, Latin America - it was supposed to be led by China.
The approach to a possible nuclear war was different. In China, it was called "paper tiger". Therefore, all the initiatives of the USSR are the fight against the paper tiger. In China, it was argued that in the aftermath of a nuclear war, not human beings would die, but decaying capitalism.
Those. there was a significant difference in foreign policy. concepts.
In 1959 Khrushchev proposed the creation of a "nuclear-free zone" in the Far East. I did not want to compete with China, because feared that China would be dragged into nuclear war. The Chinese called it betrayal.
During the Caribbean Crisis, the Chinese criticized the USSR. The deployment of missiles was called adventurism, and the removal of missiles was called capitulation.
In the same 1962, Chinese troops crossed the McMahon border with India, invaded 100 km. The USSR proposed a peaceful settlement. China called it a departure from the principles of internationalism. Formally, they were right, because. 1950 - Treaty of Friendship and Mutual Assistance.
In the 60s, China began to actively lay claim to Soviet territories. Moreover, now it was done by high officials. It was said that tsarist Russia and the USSR snatched 1.7 million square meters from China. km. The most controversial territories were along the Ussuri and Amur rivers. Motivation - the border, if it runs along the rivers, according to international law, should pass in the middle of the main fairway. Along the Ussuri-Amur, it has been carried out since tsarist times along the Chinese coast. Formally, China was right, but this is the seizure of 600 islands!
It came to military clashes 1969 - Fr. Damansky (31 border guards), Fr. Gordinsky.
Relations with China reached their peak during the Cultural Revolution. Newspaper headlines - "The Soviet Union - our mortal enemy."
Relations changed in the 1970s. You can call them confrontational stability.
In China, 2 major eg. ext. gender: 1) normalization of relations with the West and 2) the struggle for the "third world" (to lead the NOD). Both directions were carried out with the subtext of "struggle against hegemonism"
1) Have been successful. By the end of the 70s, somewhere around 78% of trade was with the West, and not with the socialist countries. In 1971, China took its seat in the UN Security Council. Since that time, the main clashes in the Security Council took place between the USSR and China.
In 1978, China signed an agreement on peace and friendship with Japan. Specialist. article - "joint struggle against hegemonism."
January 1, 1979 - The United States establishes relations with China. In the same year, China annulled the 1950 treaty with the USSR.
2) The struggle for the "third world" led to a clash with Vietnam over Cambodia. China supported the Khmer Rouge. 1979 - "the first inter-socialist war". In the PRC, Vietnam was called a regional hegemon in the service of a global hegemon. The war went on for only 1 month, Vietnam won, defeated 3 Chinese regiments (70 thousand people).
The changes are related to internal changes in the PRC.
December 1978- The 3rd Plenum of the 11th CPC Central Committee was held. On it, the Chinese Communists abandoned the policy of "cultural revolution" and advocated reforms. Deng Xiaoping's reforms: the development of a planned commodity economy, the use of market regulators, decentralization of the management of eq-ki, open external economy. politics. One country, two systems. Unprecedented reforms. Created 4 special economy. zone, 14 ports opened. The results are unique. 80s annual GDP growth - 10.5%, in special. GDP zones increased by 45 times! In the USSR, these reforms were called revisionism, before Gorbachev they were called that. Gorbachev began to pursue a similar course, but with a delay of 10 years and big mistakes.
China was ready to normalize relations with the USSR, but "there are 3 obstacles": 1. cessation of assistance to Vietnam. 2. Reduction or withdrawal of Soviet troops from the territories that adjoined the borders of China (primarily Mongolia). 3. Conclusion of owls. troops from Afghanistan.
The United States stood in solidarity with these "3 obstacles".
Only in 1989-1990 was it possible to normalize relations. Causes:
1. Two countries tried to conduct more or less similar courses.
2. By 1989, the USSR actually fulfilled those “3 obstacles”: they were withdrawn from Afghanistan, most of the islands on the Ussuri and Amur were transferred to China, and an agreement was signed on the normalization of relations.
The Soviet press and historians then and now write about the "tremendous success." But the concessions were unilateral on the part of the USSR + normalization occurred when the social system collapsed and on the eve of the collapse of the USSR itself.
Relations between the Eastern European socialist countries.
Albania took a special position.
Enver Hoxha began to oppose Albania to the entire socialist camp: 1) criticism of the cult of personality in the USSR, 2) normalization of relations between the USSR and Yugoslavia.
Albania had a slogan: "ethnically pure Kosovo" (actually Albanian Kosovo) + the idea of "Great Albania".
1961 - breakup of Albania's relations with the USSR, 1969 - exit from the Department of Internal Affairs. After Mao's death, Albania broke off relations with the PRC. Hoxha writes a book "Reflections on China". In it, he divides all countries into 3 camps: imperialism, social-imperialism, national-imperialism. Camp 4, a truly socialist one, was occupied by Albania.
Romania began to occupy a special position at the turn of 60-70.
In 1972, Ceausescu, unexpectedly for Moscow, declared Romania a "developing country." She was immediately included in the IMF, IBRD, and investments started. Romania was the only socialist country that did not break off relations with Israel during the next Arab-Israeli war of 1973.
Czechoslovakia 1968.
One of the most striking presence of centrifugal forces was the events in Czechoslovakia, the Prague Spring of 1968. Briefly, the background is as follows. In the mid-1960s, reforms began to be carried out in both the USSR and Eastern Europe to change the face of socialism. They were most active in Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia. In Czechoslovakia, they went further than Moscow demanded. Novotny resigned from the post of first secretary of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, representatives of the "young generation" headed by Alexander Dubcek came to power. He was 47, really. The slogans of the renewal of socialism have turned into a slogan of change political system. In August 1968, ATS troops were introduced into Czechoslovakia, mainly the USSR. The GDR and some others also actively participated.
In the USSR, this was called proletarian internationalism. In the West, the concept of the Brezhnev Doctrine arose - the doctrine of limited sovereignty. The small socialist countries of Europe had to show independence only to a limited extent. Our propagandists - what would the United States do if one of the Western European countries opposed their policy?
In short, 1968 played a special role in the development of socialism.
First, the conservative forces defeated the "liberal" forces. Then liberals could modernize socialism.
Economic reforms were named as the source of all troubles. And it was a terrible historical miscalculation. Economic reforms were cited as the source of the ferment that began in Czechoslovakia, and this is the foreign policy reason that they were curtailed. As historical practice has shown, it was then that reforms had to be carried out in order for socialism to survive, and they were curtailed. Thirdly, the events shook the world of socialism, because the contradictions were not removed, they went deeper. The desire to modernize socialism remained, to a lesser extent in the USSR, to a greater extent in small European countries.
And finally, Poland in the early 1980s, centrifugal forces. Reforms were also carried out in Poland, actively in the late 1960s - 1/1 of the 1970s. Poles, that's why they are Poles, unlike Czechoslovakia and Hungary, they began to take a lot of loans, not only from the USSR, but also from international Western organizations. When the recession began in the mid-1970s, a debt crisis and food problems began in Poland. The center was KOS-KO - "The Committee for Social Protection and the Committee for Protection ("?")". They wanted to change social systems. In 1980, a meeting between the strike movement and the Polish government took place in Gdansk. This was unique: the government recognized the right to strike and free trade unions, and itself called the strike movement in opposition to socialism. The strikers recognized the leading role of the PZPR and the international obligations of Poland, incl. within the ATS. After that, the Solidarity movement took shape, and somewhere in a year its number exceeded 8 million people - the majority of the economically active population of Poland. This is seven times more than the members of the Polish United Workers' Party. Lech Walesa was already nominated among the leaders at that time. A simple man, an electrician, 7 children. His fate reflected what kind of assistance the West provided to opposition movements, how wise his policy was. For 2 years he received 52 honorary titles, Doctor of Science from Harvard. Although he read only one book in his entire life. He received the Nobel Peace Prize, it is not clear why. Financial assistance from the USA and their friends.
In 1981 in Gdansk "Solidarity" adopted the "Program". There were interesting points, in Moscow they did not know how to react to them, shock.
The first point is the creation of a new socio-economic order, which would include a planned economy, self-government and a market mechanism.
The second point is the provision of freedom for enterprises in their activities in the domestic and foreign markets.
The third point is the complete freedom of the private sector, small and medium businesses.
The fourth point is a multi-party system, political pluralism. But this scared Moscow. Who dealt with this period, the Soviet press raged that it was complete revisionism, a return to capitalism. Six years have passed, and the slogans of perestroika were practically the same. The fact that Solidarity sought to destroy the social system was openly declared in 1981-83 by its leaders. Lech Walesa said that "we are quite aware that we are destroying the system." His right-hand man, Jacek Kure, has declared that our main goal is to hasten the agony of the empire. Certainly not the US, not China. In 1981, the new president of Poland, General Jaruzelski, introduced martial law in 1983, a certain compromise was - with this introduction he prevented another introduction - of the police forces.
On the example of Poland, it is clear what role non-economic factors played.
In Poland, the religious factor played an important role. In 1978, Karol Wojtyla was elected as the new Pope under the name of John Paul II. He paid his first visit to Poland. The second time he came in 1983. The Western and our press wrote about what dad was talking about. On the occasion of the 600th anniversary of the Czestochowa icon of the Mother of God, miraculous, etc., the pope announced on the Polish radio about the need political pluralism, about the beatification of three Poles, two of whom participated in the 1863 uprising against Russia. Place of Poland - between West and East, Papa said. He finished the sermon with the words - do not be afraid of Siberia. In Poland it had a huge impact. So indirectly, cunningly and wisely, he influenced domestic politics. In Poland, 98% of the adult population are Catholics.
By the mid-1980s, the situation inside the socialist camp was extremely unstable. By the beginning of the 1990s, centrifugal forces really prevailed over centripetal ones.
There are also subjective factors: "new thinking" Gorbachev.
In 1986 he wrote a memo to the Politburo on some issues of cooperation with the socialist countries. It was printed by the Soviet press, and then by Western newspapers. Gorbachev spoke frankly about the shortcomings, about the lagging behind in integration, about the presence of centrifugal forces. The leadership of the USSR recognized it as unprofitable to maintain a zone of influence in Eastern Europe and maintain communist regimes there. It was a serious mistake. "Either you reform or we don't cooperate with you."
In the West, his attitude to the socialist countries was called the doctrine of non-intervention.
In Helsinki, Gorbachev was asked that the population hated Honecker's rule. Gorbachev said that we would not interfere in the internal affairs of the socialist countries.
It's all the same that Reagan would have abandoned Latin America as a zone of special US influence.
Gorbachev stated at the American University in Turkey that the goal of his life was the destruction of communism. This is a unique hypocrisy, in essence. M.S. He was General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. On the occasion of his 80th birthday, the modern leadership presented him with the highest order of the Russian Federation.
Now the media are calling Yeltsin, Chernomyrdin and Gaidar great figures, and Chubais was awarded shortly after the Sayano-Shushenskaya hydroelectric power station .... no, not the Iron Cross with oak leaves, but the Order of Merit for the Fatherland. At the turn of 1989-90, after the velvet revolutions, it became obvious that the Cold War was won by the West. Then came the collapse of the USSR.
SECTION I
VERSAILLES-WASHINGTON SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: FORMATION. CHARACTER, ELEMENTARY PERIOD DEVELOPMENT
Results of the First World War. The alignment of forces in the international arena in the early post-war years
On November 11, 1918, in the French city of Compiègne, in the staff car of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, Marshal Ferdinand Fot, representatives of the Entente states and defeated Germany signed the Armistice Agreement. The conclusion of the Compiègne truce meant the completion of the first and the history of human civilization of the world war, which lasted four years, three months and eleven days. 101 gun volleys heralded the onset of peacetime -
The development of international relations in the postwar period was most directly and directly connected with the results of the First World War. What were these results, what was their impact on world politics on the formation of a qualitatively new system of international relations?
The most important military-political result of the world conflict was the triumphant victory of the Entente states and the crushing defeat of the countries of the Quadruple Alliance , which included Germany. Austria-Hungary. Turkey and Bulgaria,
This main result of the war was legally formalized in the Compiègne Armistice Agreement - in essence, with the exception of a few minor concessions to the German side. it can be equated with the act of unconditional surrender of Germany. Eloquent proof of this were the negotiations on the terms of the armistice. When the head of the German delegation, Reichsminister M. Erzberger, asked Marshal Foch what conditions the Allied Powers would propose for their subsequent discussion, he, with his characteristic directness of a military man, said: "There are no conditions. But there is one demand - Germany must kneel." This ended the discussion.
The demand to "kneel" was specified in the 34 articles of the Compiègne truce, which entered into force at 11 am on November 2, 191J. The text of the agreement dictated to Germany by the victorious powers included the following main provisions: the cessation of hostilities from the moment the armistice was signed: transfers; France of Alsace and Lorraine; the withdrawal of German armed forces from the territories of the Entente countries occupied by them within 15 days also from Austria-Hungary, Romania and Turkey; Germany undertook to clear the left bank of the Rhine, which was occupied by the Allied forces, from its military presence, while demilitarizing a 50-kilometer strip on its right bank; it was planned to return the trophies captured by Germany (including Russian, Belgian and Romanian gold ) and its immediate release of all prisoners of war; a significant part of the German weapons and vehicles were transferred to the Entente powers, which actually deprived Germany of its military and military-technical potential: German troops in East Africa were disarmed and evacuated; Germany forcibly renounced very benefits of the other for her the Brest-Litovsk and Bucharest treaties with Soviet Russia and Romania, concluded on March 3 and May 7, 1918, respectively. The said conditions of the Compiègne Agreement already spoke of this in themselves. what peace treaties will be dictated to the countries of the Quadruple Alliance-
Thus, the victory of the Entente in the First World War, legally enshrined in the Armistice of Compiègne, had its most important international consequence a radical change in the balance of forces in favor of the victorious powers. and to the detriment the defeated powers.
The most tragic outcome of the war was unprecedented human losses, huge material damage and destruction. This is there were four years of unprecedented exertion of strength, human sacrifice and suffering. That is why the contemporaries of the First World War rightly called it "the greatest crime against humanity."
In the war of 1914-1918. 32 states from five continents took part. Military operations took place on the territory of 14 countries. About 74 million people were mobilized into the armed forces. During the war, vast areas of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, northern France and Belgium were devastated. The damage from military destruction was estimated at $33 billion, which corresponded to the 10th part of the pre-war national income of all European countries. Total irretrievable losses are not walked in any comparison with the past. As the historical statistics, in wars XVII in. died 3.3 million .. in the XVIII century - - 5.2 million in the 19th century - 3.2 million people. For four goals First world war, the number of dead soldiers and civil persons amounted to 9 million. 442thousand. At the same time losses winners(5.4 million) exceeded the losses of the defeated (4 million) Over the same period of time in the rear of the warring states from hunger and diseases about 10 million died, were injured and crippled 21 million soldiers and officers, 6.5 million people were captured.
The direct result of the war was negative processes in the economic and especially in the socio-political sphere. The mobilization of industry for the production of weapons and military materials has led to the breakdown of the economy of all the warring countries. The production of civilian products was sharply reduced. primarily consumer goods. This gave rise to a commodity hunger, price increases, speculation. fell into disrepair and Agriculture. The number of livestock has decreased, grain harvest in European countries has decreased by 30-60%. Prices have risen two to four times while real wages have fallen by 15-20%. World economic crisis of 1920-1921 further worsened the situation.
All of the above allows us to draw the following conclusion: the most bloody and destructive war in the history of mankind has brought the peoples of the world, social movements and the political elite to the realization of the need to prevent such world conflicts, create a new, more just and safe system of international relations.
On the development of post-war international relationship could not not have a serious impact and another outcome of the First World War of fundamental importance - a sharp aggravation of social tension, the assimilation of the role of social-democratic and communist parties and organizations, a powerful upsurge of the revival movement.
Revolutionary upsurge 191U-1923 manifested itself in the most diverse forms: from workers' strikes and peasant unrest before armed uprisings and social revolutions,
Peak strike movement came in 1919. This year in In the developed capitalist countries, more than 15 million people went on strike. ra- Eyuchih - compared with the usual pre-war "norm" of 2-3 million- Human. There are two quality working features movements of that time, touching on the pressing issues of international life. First, workers' organizations besides galiion requirements for improving working conditions more and more often put forward slogans of combating reactionary politics both inside countries and in the international arena. Secondly, at their rallies and demonstrations, “the proletarians of all countries* expressed class support for the Soviet state. The demand "Hands off Soviet Russia!" met everywhere and became the slogan of the day.
It was these features that brought the labor movement closer to the general democratic, anti-war and pacifist movement, which had a broad social base: from workers and the petty bourgeoisie to well-known politicians and capitalist magnates. And although pacifism in the period under review did not take on a clear organizational shape in any country, more and more mass protests against war and aggression became an effective factor in world politics. The most impressive example is the manifestation of the solidarity of the democratic public in the West with the struggle of Soviet Russia against foreign intervention: from collecting funds and providing material assistance to sending volunteers to the Red Army.
The emergence of a new phenomenon in public life, the international communist movement, was connected with the results of the war and the revolutionary upsurge. In March 1919 in Moscow held the Constituent Congress III Communist international. In the early postwar years, the number communist parties grew at a rate threatening for Western democracies. If representatives of 35 communist parties and organizations were present at any 1st Congress of the Comintern, 11 Congress in 1920. - 67 then III congress, held in the summer 1921, collected plenipotentiaries of 103 communist parties. In 1922 there were 1 million 700 thousand communists in the world - 7 times more, than in 1917
During this period, the influence of the international communist movement on world politics, in accordance with its guiding principle of "democratic centralism", was built according to the scheme: Soviet Russia - Comintern - national communist parties. At the same time, the general foreign policy line of the Third International was formulated extremely simply and clearly: all-round assistance to the world proletarian revolution and all-round support for the world's first socialist state.
Other an influential factor in international life was the revival and development of the social democratic movement. On the conferences of social democratic parties in Bern in February 1919. was restored II International. As a result his associations with II"/g the International in 1923 arose the Socialist Workers' International. To that time in the world was
to about 60 social democratic and socialist parties
uniting more than 8 million members.
The special role of social democracy in solving major international problems was determined not only by the growing size of the movement, but also by the main provisions of its foreign policy program: a firm adherence to the ideology of pacifism and an extremely negative attitude towards the idea of world revolution and the principles of proletarian internationalism. promoted by the communists.
The social crisis that engulfed at the end of the war all over Europe, resulted in a series of revolutionary upheavals. February and October 1917 revolution in Russia. November 1918 revolution in Germany, revolutionary events in Finland. Austria. Czechoslovakia, the Baltic countries, education in 1919. The Bavarian and Hungarian Soviet Republics - this is by no means a complete list of acute revolutionary conflicts. In the context of the problems under consideration, it is important to note that the leaders of the European revolutions K. Liebknecht, R. Luxembourg. O. Levine. B. Kuhn, T. Samueli and others, along with demands for a radical reorganization of society, put forward slogans of revolutionary-democratic transformation of international relations, struggle against imperialist wars and aggression, freedom and equality of all countries and peoples, and all-round support for communist Russia.
Great social storm. caused by the First World War, became the most important component of the formation of a new world order and a new international system for at least two reasons: as a powerful factor in the democratization of international relations and as a serious obstacle to aggressive, imperialist foreign policy due to the involvement of government circles in internal socio-political problems, the fight against revolutionary danger *.
The epicenter of revolutionary upheavals and the result of a war of historical significance was the victory of the October Revolution in Russia; the coming to power of the Bolsheviks and the formation of the Soviet state.
Modern detractors and critics October, exactly the same his fierce opponents in the past, are trying to reduce the Russian revolution to the level of a "Bolshevik coup", a historical accident caused by "clouding of the people's consciousness.". This approach seems to be overly ideologized and. more importantly, unprofessional - enough to understand the terminology. A revolution, unlike a coup, is a historical phenomenon of a much more fundamental and global nature. Firstly, it not only leads to the replacement of power structures, but also introduces radical changes in the political and socio-economic system. toy country where it happened. Secondly, it has an enormous impact on the entire course of the world process, including the development of international relations. In accordance with these criteria, the October events of 1917. represented in Russia not"local" coup d'état and even not just a revolution. but the Great Revolution.
What was the international significance of October?
First of all, the victory of the Russian revolution meant whatthe world is rasko.yu."1sya into two opposing socio-political systems. IN AND. In this connection, Lenin said: "Now the two camps, in full consciousness, stand against each other on a world scale." A new era has begun - the era of struggle, confrontation between the two systems. Or. in other words, a qualitatively new contradiction arose in international relations - a class contradiction. "inter-formation", ideological-
It should be noted, however, that the split peace happened in all spheres of public life: economic (nationalization of foreign property by the Bolsheviks and the annulment of foreign loans; economic blockade by Western powers Soviet Russia), diplomatic (non-recognition of Soviet power by the West), military (preparation and organization of armed intervention in the “country of Soviets”), ideological (“incompatibility”, mutual rejection of two ideologies, deployment of agitation and propaganda war on both sides).
Direct influence on the theory and practice of international relations was put forward by the Bolshevik leadership new principles of foreign policy activity, which can be divided into two main groups.
One of them was the general democratic principles declared in the first foreign policy acts of the Soviet government (Decree on Peace, adopted by the II Congress of Soviets on October 26, 1917; Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia from November 15, 1917;
Appeal to all working Muslims of Russia and the East of December 3, 1917): "a just democratic world without annexations and indemnities", openness and openness of diplomacy, the right of the nation "to free self-determination up to secession and formation of an independent state", "equality and confidence" large and small peoples, "the abolition of all and any national and national-religious privileges and restrictions." development of economic relations on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, etc.
These principles, later transformed into the concept of peaceful coexistence, could not but evoke a response from the government circles of the Western powers, which was reflected in their plans for a post-war peace settlement (for example, in the "Fourteen Points" of US President Wilson). Moreover, at the end of 1917, the Soviet government began (or, rather, was forced" to put into practice its foreign policy program. Recognizing the independence of Finland, Poland, the Baltic countries, which previously were integral parts of
Russian Empire.
The second group included rigid class attitudes associated with the doctrine of the world revolution and called the principles of proletarian internationalism. They assumed unconditional support for the struggle against "world capital": from moral encouragement and material assistance to the revolutionaries. About the organization of the "red intervention", since, according to the leader of the "left communists" N.I. Bukharin, "the spread of the Red Army is the spread of socialism, proletarian power, revolution."
These revolutionary attitudes and attempts to put them into practice also evoked a response from Western leaders, but already, for obvious reasons, extremely negative and militant. It is no coincidence that I. Lloyd George, very cautious in his assessments, declared; "The Bolsheviks are fanatical revolutionaries who dream of conquering the whole world by force of arms."
The contradictory nature of the principles of peaceful coexistence and proletarian internationalism determined their dual role in the formation of the post-war system of international relations: if the former could contribute to its democratization and strengthening, the latter were a destabilizing factor.
The October Revolution and the establishment of Soviet power in Russia influenced the development of international relations and indirectly, being the real embodied goal of the labor, communist and revolutionary movement, which, in its
Turn, as mentioned above, has become an important component of world politics and international life Speaking about the results of the First World War. needs to be highlighted unprecedented scope of the national and national liberation movement.
The last years of the wars were marked by the collapse of four once mighty empires: Russian. German. Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman- In Europe, without waiting for international legal registration, Austria and Hungary proclaimed their independence. Poland, Finland. Czechoslovakia. Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Lithuania. Latvia. Estonia.
Such a radical breakdown of the international structure required the pacifier powers to make significant adjustments to their approach to the problems of a peaceful settlement, taking into account the new political realities and the national interests of the newly formed European states.
Almost the entire colonial world was engulfed in the national liberation struggle. This was explained both by the growth of national self-consciousness and by the weakening of the metropolitan powers during the World War. In 1918-1921. major anti-colonial and anti-imperialist actions - from mass demonstrations to armed uprisings and liberation wars - took place in India. China, Mongolia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya. Morocco, Afghanistan and other colonial and dependent countries.
The first significant successes were achieved on the path to national liberation. In November 1918, the leaders of the Libyan tribes proclaimed the creation of the Tripolitan Republic, which, in a fierce struggle against the Italian colonialists, defended its independence until the 1930s. As a result of the third Anglo-Afghan war, in August 1919, the Rawalpinda Peace Treaty was signed, according to which England recognized the independence of Afghanistan. troops in 1926. In February 1922 The British government published a Declaration on the abolition of the English protectorate and the recognition of Egypt as an independent state.
The national liberation movement in the first post-war years nominated from its ranks the largest political and state figures, such as Sun Yat-sen in China, Mo-handas Karamchand Gandhi India, Mustafa KemalAtaturk in Turkey, Amanullah Khan in Afghanistan. Their program requirements, despite differences in the question of the means to achieve goals, had a pronounced anti-imperialist and democratic character; independence and sovereignty; abolition of foreign political and financial control, mode capitulations; recognition of ethnic boundaries; freedom and equality:your all peoples. Many country leaders East emphasized the importance of rapprochement with Soviet Russia, what they were striving for practice.
Assessing the role and significance of the national liberation movement in the colonial world during this period of time, can come to the following conclusion.
Firstly, the most important consequence of the liberation Zorba in this political region was a change in the tactics of the colonial powers: from carrying out transformations in the management of the colonies while expanding the rights of the local population (one of the examples is the “Montagu-Chelmsford reform”, which the British government carried out in 1919 in India) until the recognition of political independence while maintaining economic and financial dominance over the liberated country (one of the examples is the granting of independence by England to Egypt while maintaining full control over the Suez Canal, the rights to "protect the interests of foreigners" and other conditions that made the proclaimed independence in largely fictitious). In essence, these were the first attempts to move from classical colonial policy to neo-colonialist methods. At the same time, new methods so far constituted an exception to the general rule: the leading metropolitan powers built their relations with subordinate im t territories based on direct political and military domination. On the whole, the colonial and semi-colonial countries (even those that had declared their independence) continued to be the object of the policy of the great powers, to be in a position subordinate and dependent on them.
Secondly, just like the revolutionary upsurge in Europe, the national liberation movement in the colonial world contributed to the democratization of international relations. many Representatives of the Western political elite started talking seriously about the "right of nations to self-determination" and about resolving the colonial issue "taking into account the interests of the local population."
These were the main results of the First World War and the cardinal changes associated with them in the post-war international situation.
Should. but, note that character new system international relations and its legal registration in decide- degree depended on alignment and balance of power between the great powers - the main subjects of world politics. For obvious reasons, we are talking primarily about the powers-
winners who, by the right of the strong, were to determine the principles and conditions for a peaceful settlement and the post-war organization of the world. What changes have taken place in the international situation these states after the end First world war?
The United States benefited the most from it. States of America: the war turned this country into a first-class world power. It created favorable conditions for rapid economic growth and a significant improvement in the financial position of the United States.
As is known. United States entered the war only in April 1917, and active hostilities began in July 1918 i.e. shortly before completion. Losses USA were relatively small: 50 thousand people were killed (0.5% of the total losses in the war) and 230 thousand were wounded. From senior officers, one colonel died: being drunk, he fell off his horse and crashed to death. The territory of the United States itself, due to its remoteness from Europe, was not affected by military operations and, therefore, unlike the European countries, the United States managed to avoid any material damage and destruction.
Another and much more significant condition for strengthening the economic positions of the United States was their "participation of a supplier" of military materials, food and raw materials for the warring countries of Europe. As a result, the net profits of the American corporations making these deliveries amounted to $33.5 billion, a figure that exceeded the estimated cost of all the material destruction on the European continent. New large investments significantly increased the production possibilities of the American economy and ensured its rapid growth. In 1920 The US share in world industrial production exceeded 33%. In individual branches of industry that determine economic power, it ranged from 50% (coal mining) to 60% (iron and steel production) and even V5% (automobile production). The value of American exports from 1914 to 1919 increased by Zraza: from 2.4 to 7.9 billion dollars. Thus, the most important consequence of the war was a sharp strengthening of the US position in the world economy, consolidation behind them the role of the most economically powerful power in the world.
Another significant metamorphosis was a radical change in the international financial status of the United States. The payment of military orders by the allies and the associated transfer of securities from European banks to American banks reduced Europe's investment in the United States during the 4 years of the war from 5 to 3 billion dollars.
On the other hand, over the same period, American investment behind abroad increased and 6 times; from 3 to 18 billion dollars. If before the war the United States owed Europe 3.7 billion dollars, then after the war Europe already owed the United States 11 billion dollars, which was 55% of the mutual debt of the allied states, which was estimated at n 20 billion. dollars. This meant that the United States turned from a debtor country into the largest international creditor. In the early 1920s. The United States owned half of the world's gold reserves (4.5 out of 9 billion dollars: 1.5 billion - accounted for by England and France, the remaining 3 - by 40 states). Along with London, New York became the universally recognized* financial capital of the world.
The strengthening of the financial position of the United States, combined with economic leadership, created the material basis for the transformation of the country from a regional to a great world power. In a broader international aspect, this meant the transfer of the industrial and financial center of the capitalist world from Europe to North America.
These were the reasons that led to the intensification of US foreign policy. Becoming the leading power in the world in terms of economic and financial indicators. The United States is beginning to lay claim to a leading role in world politics as well. And if earlier ideas "Rah Atepsapa". While the slogans of establishing "world leadership" of the United States, put forward by American politicians, were only an illusion, after the end of the war they seemed to have acquired real meaning. Already in April 1917. President Woodrow Wilson publicly proclaimed:
“We are faced with the task of financing the whole world. a that. whoever gives money must learn to rule the world.”
At the same time, as the example of the United States shows, a sharp increase in economic and financial power is not always adequate for such same a sharp strengthening of political positions in the international arena. The change in the balance of power between the great powers in favor of the United States during this period did not lead to its transformation into a political leader on a global scale. And there were reasons for this that limited the influence of the United States on the development of post-war international relations.
First of all. American business has not yet been enough prepared” for the role of trendsetter in the global economy. Partly this was due to the fact that the development of the vast domestic market was far from being completed. In the early 1920s 85-90% of industrial output in the US was consumed domestically. As for excess capital, then. except for an emergency situation during the war years, it was exported to a limited number countries of the Western Hemisphere. In other sectors of the world market, where European capital has retained its dominant position. USA faced fierce competition.
Secondly. An even more significant obstacle to "world leadership" was the ideology and practice of American isolationism. The main meaning of this foreign policy course, which starts demolition from< Про шального послания» первою президента США Джорджа Вашингтон;!, сводился к отказу от каких-or obligations and agreements with the states of the Old World, which could draw the United States into European military-political conflicts and, thereby, undermine their independence both in domestic and foreign policy. "Internationalists", seeking to overcome this age-old tradition, without which active participation in world politics and, Moreover, the achievement of political leadership in the world remained would well-wishes, were losing the battle to the isolationists. The serious advantages of being an isolationist were explained primarily topics. that they enjoyed the support of the population, among whom were widely the ideas of so-called democratic isolationism are widespread - the ideas of the struggle to establish and maintain a just social order within the country with a complete rejection of external military adventures and colonial conquests. As far as isolationist politicians are concerned, they have never challenged the right USA on economic expansion and the role of international arbiter, but strongly opposed the participation of the United States in any unions and agreements with European states. The paradox of the situation was therein, that attempts by government circles USA pursue a policy consistent with the economic and financial power of the great North American power, could be blocked (as happened in practice) within the United States itself States.
Thirdly. Foreign policy any power in solving global world problems should rely on Not only on a powerful economic potential, but also on an equally significant military potential. In this area, the United States significantly lagged behind the European powers - Land Army USA was, as ironically noted in Europe, "an indeterminate value." Large-scale programs to build a modern navy in those goals were only an application for the future. Overall military strength USA was more than compensated by the naval superiority of England, the strength of the ground forces of France - and after a while, by high level war machine organization Germany and Japan.
Fourth. Another factor that limited the foreign policy possibilities of the United States. lay in the realm of practical diplomacy. Even the first attempts by the American administration to play a leading role in international affairs met with a resolute rebuff from the governments of England and France, experienced in diplomacy. And in this area the advantage was not on the side of the United States.
These were the real contours of international US positions in the first post-war period. Them Influence at development international relations, no matter how contradictory sounds. became more and more clear and at the same time remained very limited.
International Position Great Britain after graduation wars are extremely difficult to characterize clearly.
On the one hand, one can state the well-known weakening its position in the world, which was due to the following reasons, the victory went to England expensive yen. Her human losses amounted to 744 thousand killed and about 1.700 thousand wounded - Such the history of this country did not know military losses. The war has done a lot significant damage to the British economy. United Kingdom lost about 20% of the national wealth. how in the years war. So and in the first post-war years continued shrink industrial production. As a result, the pre-war level was reached only in 1929. (the worst figure among all Western powers). Significantly inferior USA. England finally lost of its former industrial leadership in the world. Her share in world industrial production progressively decreased. compiled in 1920. 9% (in comparison from 13.6% in 1913) Huge military spending sharply worsened the financial UK position, For the first time in long goals of financial prosperity she is evolved from the most influential international creditor in debtor country. Her post-war external debt rated 5 billion dollars, of which 3.7 billion were share of the US-Wo during the war were undermined and foreign trade positions England- The country has lost 40% of its trade front- Traditional foreign economic relations were interrupted. Eventually English foreign trade decreased by almost 2 times. a her foreign investments - by 25%. powerful rise national liberation movement became another "blow of fate *, from which in England suffered the most occupied leading place among the colonial powers.
Together However, the above-mentioned negative UK effects First no world war absolutize. There were other factors that allowed this country not only maintain its position as a great world power, but in some areas to strengthen them. , -.
First, despite the first signs of the crisis of the British Empire, England managed to defend itself as a result of the war. my colonial monopoly. Furthermore. her colonial possessions were expanded in July ^ by obtaining a mandate on the administration of territories formerly belonging to Germany and Turkey. If before the war, England accounted for 44.9% of the colonial possessions of the world, then after the war - 5R%,
Secondly, in the first post-war years, the priority of the strongest British navy in the world remained unshakable. British government circles strove to strictly adhere to them the same developed formula: the British fleet should be larger than the combined fleet of the other two powers.
Thirdly, the deterioration of England's financial position could be considered temporary and relative. Her debt to the United States was largely offset by England's debt from continental European states, which exceeded $4.3 billion.
Fourthly, and the asset of England, of course, should be attributed to the defeat of Germany's main pre-war competitor and the change in the European balance forces in favor of the United Kingdom, the high international prestige of the winner in the war, traditionally a major role in world diplomacy and vast experience in resolving complex international problems a realistic and sufficiently far-sighted foreign policy of the British government.
World War brought significant changes to the international status French Republic.
The triumph of victory could only for a time obscure the extremely grave consequences of the war. First of all, this was the enormous material damage and numerous human casualties. In terms of military losses, France was second only to Germany and Russia: 1327 thousand killed and 2800 thousand wounded. The northeastern departments of France were almost completely devastated, more than 10 thousand industrial enterprises and about 1 million residential buildings were destroyed. The total amount of material losses was estimated at 15 billion dollars, which was 31% of the pre-war national wealth. The deplorable state of the French economy was explained not only by the material damage and destruction caused by the war, but also by the deep crisis associated with the post-war reconversion, i.e. the transfer of industry to the production of peaceful products. The crisis lasted from 1918 to 1921. The index of industrial production dropped to 55% of the 1913 level. Even more serious losses awaited France in the financial area. The war deprived her of her role as "world usurer". putting them on a par with other debtor states. French debt USA and England exceeded 7 billion dollars. A powerful blow to the financial positions of France was inflicted by the October Revolution: 71 * ^ of all the debts of the tsarist and Provisional rulers ^ ti. canceled by the Soviet government, fell to the share of the French Republic. Not could not have had a negative impact on the international position of France and such consequences of the war as a sharp reduction in foreign trade turnover (almost 2 times) and foreign investment (by 30%), as well as the aggravation of the national liberation struggle in the French colonies.
However, as in the case of England, the positive outcomes of the war for France prevailed over the negative ones, which allowed her not only to maintain, but also to strengthen her position as a great world power.
First, through the acquisition of the so-called mandated territories, France managed to significantly increase its colonial empire. Its share in the colonial possessions of the world increased from 15.1% in 1913 to 15.1%. up to 29% after the end of the war. Following Great Britain, France remained the most powerful metropolitan country.
Secondly, in the first post-war period, the French Republic had the most powerful land army in the world.
Thirdly, the socio-economic instability caused by huge material losses in the war seemed to be a temporary factor. The transformation of France from from an agrarian-industrial country to an industrial-agrarian power in the future should have significantly improved the economic situation of the republic. As for the financial damage, it was supposed to compensate for it with reparations levied from Germany.
Fourth. military defeat of the German empire and post-war policy of the French government aimed at on the maximum attenuation of the traditional and the most formidable enemy, created favorable conditions for statements France's leading role on the European continent.
Another winning country Italy- before the war on law was considered one of the weak links among the great European powers.
The World War did not contribute to This position no matter how serious positive changes. Rather, on the contrary, she demonstrated economic and military failure of Italy, becoming an unbearable burden for her. During the war, Italy lost 5JOtys. soldiers and officers. After a crushing defeat in the first major battle for the Italians at Caporet- then in In October 1917, the Italian troops were completely demoralized and remained in this state until the very end of the war. A record number of deserters and voluntarily surrendered to captured (more than 1 million people) allowed military experts to call the Italian army "the most captivating army in the world." The Italian economy could not withstand military stress. All the main branches of Italian industry fell into decay. 1 public debts exceeded the country's national wealth by 70%. Economic recession. social tension and financial chaos was accompanied by a deep political crisis, which manifested itself in the extreme instability of power structures.All this testified that, despite the victory in the war, Italy continued to play a subordinate, in a sense, a secondary role in post-war international relations in comparison with other victorious powers.
Together with that in the early 1920s. in the economic and political development of Italy, new trends appeared that were supposed to increase the influence of this country on world politics.
First, the process of revival of Italian industry that began immediately after the war led to this. that already in 1920. in terms of industrial output, Italy reached the pre-war level. This laid the foundation for fairly rapid economic growth in Italy in subsequent years.
Secondly, Yeshe more important had political processes. As a result of the infamous "campaign on Rome" in 1922 Fascism came to power in Italy. The leader of the Italian fascists, Benito Mussolini, in his policy statements openly preached the idea of a sharp intensification of Italy's foreign policy. Slogans of expansion, new colonial conquests. "reconstruction of the Great Roman Empire", as well as practical preparation for their implementation, could not but affect the foreign policy situation Italy and on the international situation as a whole.
Japan, entered the war on the side of the Entente in August 1914, but did not take an active part in it. Her military operations were mainly reduced to the hunt for German cruisers in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Japan's contribution to the overall victory over the enemy can be indirectly estimated by its military losses, which amounted to about 300 people. But the results of the war turned out to be Japan over than favorable.
First, by lightning fast already in at the very beginning wars German possessions in the Far East and quiet ocean. Japan significantly strengthened its position in that region peace. She mastered the strategically and economically important districts:
Marshall. the Caroline and Mariana Islands, the territory of Guangzhou leased by Germany in China, as well as the Chinese province of Shanlong with a population of 36 million people.
Secondly, taking advantage of the preoccupation of the European powers with the war, Japan made the first attempt to establish control over all of China. In January 1915 She presented the interim President of the Republic of China Yuan Shikai with an ultimatum, which went down in history under the name * 21 demands. This document actually turned China into a Japanese semi-colony (recognition of the occupation regime in Shandong, Japan's "control rights" in South Manchuria and Inner Mongolia, preventing any other powers from managing Chinese territories, appointing Japanese advisers to the armed forces and government bodies China". It is no coincidence that May 9, 1915. - The day of the signing of this agreement by the democratic public of China was declared a "day of national disgrace." However, Japan was not completely satisfied with what had been achieved and achieved more: it succeeded in 1915-1917. to conclude with the allies ~ England, France and Russia - secret treaties, according to which the latter recognized it special rights and interests" in China.
Thirdly, another extremely beneficial result of the war for Japan was the ousting of the Western powers engaged in the war in Europe from the Asian markets. This largely explained the extremely rapid growth of the Japanese economy. In 1920, the volume of industrial production exceeded the pre-war level by 70% (an annual increase of 10%). Over the same period, exports of Japanese goods increased by 330%.
This was how the material basis for the new external policy of Japan, which has begun the practical implementation of its own developed concept of "Asia for Asians" (read:
"Asia for Japan"). All the above testified About, that during the war years and in the first post-war period Japan fast transformed from a leading regional into a great world power.
From defeated Quadruple states union before war status"great powers" were Germany and Austria-Hungary. Ottoman Empire, formally called "great" only the size of the territories included in it, in fact it was a semi-colonial and dependent country. As for Bulgaria, it could be considered "great" only among small Balkan peoples.
The main striking force of the German Quadruple Alliance empire, as mentioned above. suffered a crushing defeat in the war.
Germany excelled by number irretrievable military losses - 2 million 37 thousand German soldiers and officers died. The direct result of the war was the catastrophic state of the economy. The release of industrial products in 1920. compared with the pre-war level was 58%. The production of agricultural products was reduced by 3 times. An acute social and political crisis resulted in the November Revolution. the overthrow of the Hohenpollern monarchy and the proclamation of the Weimar Republic. Already by the Armistice of Compiegne, Germany lost its navy, a significant part of its weapons and all colonial possessions.
Assessing the post-war international state of the country an unambiguous conclusion, which then seemed undeniable, suggested itself: Germany had lost its great power status, it had left the international arena as a great world power for decades to come.
In a certain sense, the world war dealt an even more crushing blow to international positions. Austria-Hungary.
By analogy with Germany, Austria-Hungary, as a defeated state, experienced all the devastating consequences of the war:
great material damage and human losses (1 million 100 thousand people);
economic and financial collapse; revolutionary crisis, the collapse of the Habsburg Monarchy and the establishment of the Austrian Republic. However, in the context of the development of international relations, more a significant outcome of the war was the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The wave of the national liberation movement already in the autumn of 1918. swallowed up the "patchwork monarchy", in the place of which four independent states were formed.
Thus, unlike Germany, Austria-Hungary did not simply and not temporarily lose its great power status, it lost it forever; in the recent past, a powerful empire ceased to exist not only as a great power, but also as a state.
Particular attention should be paid to the characterization of the international situation Soviet Russia.
Despite significant territorial losses in the European part of the former Russian Empire - Finland, Poland. Estonia. Latvia and Lithuania became sovereign states. the western parts of Ukraine and Belarus went to Poland. and Bessarabia was annexed by Romania - Russia in its new incarnation continued to be an important factor in international life. The main thing is that it has retained the status of a great power with all its obvious signs.
First of all, it is a vast territory and a huge internal potential. “Socialism within one country* occupied 17% of the territory and accounted for 8% of the world's population. Another indicator of “great power” was the complete independence of the political course of Soviet Russia. There could be no talk of any dependence on the West either in the foreign policy of the RSFSR (expectation and encouragement of a world revolution) or in domestic policy (an experiment in building a new society). A major role in strengthening the international position of the Land of Soviets was played by "class solidarity" and assistance from the workers', communist and national liberation movements. The Soviet-Bolshevik regime demonstrated its vitality and viability in the civil war and in the struggle against foreign intervention. He leaned on the support of the vast majority of the population, and this. according to V.I. Lenin, this is the main and irrefutable "proof of the true strength of the state."
However, the victory of the October revolution and conservation Soviet Russia's great power status at all not meant strengthening its international positions. On the contrary, one can speak of their extreme weakening compared to pre-war imperial Russia.
The reasons are well known; unprecedented material damage and many millions of human victims caused by the imperialist and civil wars, foreign intervention, white and red terror, during the World War, Russia lost 1 million! 1 thousand people (the second largest number of irretrievable losses after Germany). In civil war 800 thousand people died on both sides. The famine of 1921 claimed 3 million human lives. Hundreds of thousands of people became victims of terror, an exact count of which is impossible. In general, the population of Russia decreased in the period from 1918 to 1922. by 15.1 million people. The total material damage inflicted on the Russian economy during the two wars was estimated at 76.5 billion gold rubles.. which accounted for 51% of the pre-war national wealth. The volume of industrial production by 1921 decreased by 7 times (15% of the level of 1913), foreign trade turnover - by 33 times (3% of the pre-war level). Already these figures and facts testified to the catastrophic deterioration of Russia's international economic positions. Its share in the world gross product fell from 6% in 1913 to 2% in 1921. The per capita national income, amounting to $120 by the end of the civil war, was 20 times less than in the United States and $10 less than in semi-colonial China.
In addition to the critical state of the economy and the aggravation of the internal political struggle, another very unfavorable factor for Soviet Russia was its complete international isolation. Diplomatic non-recognition, economic blockade, direct military-political pressure - all this allowed V.I. Lenin when characterizing the international position of Soviet Russia, compare it with a "besieged fortress", "a socialist island in the ocean of raging imperialist elements",
Thus, in the first post-war years, the international positions of the Soviet state were extremely fragile and unstable. Her material possibilities did not go neither in what comparison with the economic and military might of the great Western powers. The balance of forces in the confrontation between the two socio-political systems undoubtedly developed in favor of the capitalist West. Therefore, the main directions of development of international relations were determined by the policies and contradictions of the Western powers, and not struggle and relations "capitalism-socialism".
Such was the general picture of the alignment of forces and international positions of the great powers after the end of the First World War. It was this new alignment of forces that became the basis of the post-war system of international relations. Its main contours were outlined in the plans of the victorious powers.
Plans of the great powers for a peaceful settlement and post-war organization of the world
The plans for the post-war order of the world, with which the victorious powers came to the peace conference, reflected three initial points: 1) the main results of the world war; 2) a new alignment of forces between the great powers; 3) the international position of the country and her national-state goals and interests.
The most ambitious plan was U.S.A. It was stated by President Woodrow Wilson in a message to the US Congress on January 8, 191 I r- in the form of fourteen points, or "basic principles." The content of the program peace" Wilson boiled down to the following.
Point 1 declared the rejection of secret diplomacy, publicity in peace negotiations. "open peace treaties". Paragraph The 2nd solemnly declared freedom of navigation in peacetime and wartime, or "freedom of the seas". Paragraph 3 spoke of yet another freedom - freedom of trade, the elimination of all customs barriers, i.e. on the international recognition of the principles of "open doors" and "equal opportunities". Point 4 demanded the establishment of firm guarantees to ensure the reduction of national armaments "to the utmost minimum." Paragraph 5 proclaimed a “completely independent, impartial solution to the colonial question” with equal consideration of the interests of not only the mother countries, but also the population of the colonies (despite the vague wording, it was about recognizing the right of colonial peoples to self-determination and independence). Point 6, devoted to Russia, asserted its right to "freely determine" its national policy and the path of political development (although in the comments on this point, stored in the "Archive" of Wilson's chief adviser, Colonel E. M-House, the need was emphasized to support "democratic forces" of Russia, to which the US administration did not include the Bolsheviks:
moreover, as one of the options for resolving the Russian issue, it was proposed to divide the former Russian Empire into a number of independent states and territories controlled by the Western powers). Points 7 to 13 contained American proposals for settling the most important territorial and state problems: the restoration of the sovereignty and borders of Belgium; the return of Alsace and Lorraine to France: the establishment of the borders of Italy "on clearly expressed national lines"; granting the peoples of Austria-Hungary the rights of autonomy and independent development: restoration of the sovereignty of Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, preservation of access to the sea for Serbia: independent existence of the Turkish nation, autonomy and independence of other nationalities that are part of the Ottoman Empire, international guarantees of free passage through the Black Sea straits for ships of all countries; the creation of an independent Poland, including the undisputed Polish territories and having access to the sea. The 14th and last point provided for the establishment of an international, supranational organization for the preservation and maintenance of peace - in order to "provide mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to countries equally large and small." The President of the United States called the projected organization the "League of Nations".
Thus, in Wilson's program, democratic and even radical slogans, unusual for that time, were put forward. A massive publicity campaign was launched in the American and European press praising the Fourteen Points, which was translated into many languages and distributed worldwide in over 6 million copies. The propaganda emphasis was placed on Wilson's allegedly completely disinterested desire to establish a new international order based on the principles of freedom, democracy and justice. Admiring Americans called Wilson "the great peacemaker" and "the apostle of peace." Enthusiastic Europeans greeted the US President who arrived at the peace conference with banners: "Glory to Wilson the Right" -*. Streets and squares in the cities of Italy, France and other European countries were named after him. the plan is the real content of the United States' program proposals for the creation of a new world order.
How can one characterize Wilson's "Peace Program" - at that time, indeed, the largest American foreign policy initiative in the history of the United States? What were the aims behind the pompous democratic and pacifist phraseology?
This question is far from being idle, since in the historical literature there have been long disputes about the meaning and meaning of the “Peace Program” of the United States: from panegyric assessments in Western, primarily in American historiography, to derogatory criticism in Soviet historiography.
An unbiased analysis of the document rejects these extreme views. The Fourteen Points is a complex and contradictory foreign policy act that took into account both the peculiarities of the post-war international position of the United States itself and the new trends in world development. Therefore, it contained demands of both an imperialist and a democratic nature.
First. Wilson's program was the first official declaration by the American government of US claims to be the world's political leader, the "ultimate arbiter" in international affairs. It was a bid to lead the post-war world.
The material basis of globalist aspirations USA was their transformation into the leading industrial and financial power of the world. The ideological justification was developed in detail by the American expansionists back in late XIX in. Not surprisingly, after the end of World War I wars in the USA
the ideas and slogans of "destiny" and "divine destiny", "democratic expansion"* and the establishment of "American peace" again became widespread. wilson only gave these ideas an international legal sound. An indirect confirmation of the new trends in American foreign policy was the solemnity and pomposity that accompanied the first trip of an incumbent president to Europe in the history of America (the number of the American delegation exceeded 1,300 people). Wilson, who went to the Old World on the George Washington, broke a long tradition, since the solution of such important tasks and the realization of such great goals required his personal presence at the conference.
About what is the main thing in the program Wilson had claims to leading role in the world, testifies the content itself"Fourteen Points" and comments on them from the side the president and his advisers.
It is significant that the central idea American plan became the idea creation of the League nations, wherein USA was "booked" place of the world "superarbiter". In other words. league Nations was considered by government circles United States as the main instrument of political leadership. tool for "extending the Monroe Doctrine to the entire world". AT Europe the background of this initiative of Wilson well understood. calling the projected organization a firm "Yankee & Co". Explaining to his compatriots the meaning of the League of Nations, President of the U.S.A. proving himself a worthy son of a Presbyterian pastor preached; "America became the first world power... We need solve the only question: do we have the right give up moral guidance that is offered us. accept whether we or reject the trust of the world... Us God is leading. We not Can retreat - We can only follow forward with gaze fixed on to heaven, and cheerful in spirit. By demonstrating enough high level of oratory. Wilson has shown as you can combine "heavenly forces" and "divine providence" with a more obvious earthly goal of establishing American hegemony in the world.
In this context, other democratic-pacifist points put forward in the US President's program also acquire a more real meaning.
Stirring up the public opinion slogan of openness negotiations and the rejection of secret diplomacy in specific conditions post-war period meant the abolition of secret contracts Entente countries on the division of spheres of influence and a new redistribution of the world. Not participating in their compilation. The United States rightly feared that American interests were not taken into account in these agreements. The conclusion suggested itself: it was necessary to annul all previous secret treaties in order to create a new treaty system in which the Mr.
The rather pacifist-sounding clause on the reduction and limitation of armaments was explained not only by the military backwardness of the United States from the European powers and by a completely inhuman desire for general disarmament. The main thing was different: the principle of "maximum reduction in armaments" provided the United States with the most favorable conditions in the struggle for political predominance in the world, since the determining factor in rivalry was not military, but economic power, i.e. an area where the United States unquestionably led the way.
Thus, Wilson's "Fourteen Points" was a kind of manifesto, in which, under the guise of pacifist slogans, the desire of the American administration to bring the United States to the forefront of world politics, to consolidate its position as a leading power not only in the economic, but also in the political sphere, was traced.
Second. The US "Peace Program" not only proclaimed a fundamentally new goal of American foreign policy, it also outlined qualitatively new methods for achieving this goal.
During the war years, the government circles of all the great European powers considered the post-war order of the world in traditional terms. The foundation of the post-war world order was to be the changed balance of power, reinforced by large-scale annexations of the winners at the expense of the losers, i.e. it was supposed to carry out a new redistribution of the world. United States already with conpa 19th century opposed classical methods colonial conquests and military-political expansion. they opposed them with the doctrine of “open doors” and “equal opportunities” (proclaimed! in 1899 by US Secretary of State J. Hay in relation to China). Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” contained a demand for international recognition of this doctrine, but no longer as regional, but as a fundamental principle of world politics.
The strategic line proposed by the American government. was to rely on economic advantages and not resorting to wide territorial conquest, oust foreign competitors and secure a dominant position in the world. Unlike England and France, who owned vast territories and established complete political dominance there. The United States sought to achieve its goal primarily through economic and financial leverage. Their program was not otuy- new territorial acquisitions, but the transformation of economic power into world political leadership.
Open door policy beyond the solution this main task had a number of significant advantages before open annexationism. She is allowed avoid excessive spending on military needs and use democratic, national liberation and anti-imperialist traditions, since the main goal was not military, but "peaceful" financial and economic subordination. This policy finally made it possible to condemn the colonial practice European powers and caused a certain sympathy politically exploited and oppressed countries and peoples. Doctrine"open doors" thus represented a theory and the practice of economic colonialism, already contained contains elements of neo-colonialist politics, which finally formed after World War II.
In a sense, this international initiative USA can be called liberal alternative traditional imperialist course, the policy of colonial conquests and military dictate.
The Second World War led to fundamental changes in the world and international relations. Fascist Germany and Italy, militarist Japan were defeated, war criminals were punished, and an international organization, the United Nations, was created. All this demonstrated the relative unity of the victorious powers. The great powers reduced their armed forces: the USA from 12 to 1.6 million people, the USSR - from 11.4 to 2.5 million people.
The war led to drastic changes on the world map. First of all, the United States has grown enormously in economic, military and political terms. This country owned the vast majority of world industrial production and gold and foreign exchange reserves. The United States had a first-class army, turned into the leader of the Western world. Germany and Japan were defeated and left the ranks of the leading countries, other European countries were weakened by the war.
The military and political influence of the USSR increased significantly. However, its international position was paradoxical: the country that won at the cost of heavy losses was ruined, but, despite this, it had a legitimate right to claim a prominent role in the life of the world community. The economic ruin was offset by military and political advantages. The USSR derived political benefits, in particular, thanks to the vast territory of the countries of South-Eastern Europe under its control. He had the largest army in the world, but at the same time, in the field of military technology, he was far ahead of the United States and Great Britain.
In general, the position of the USSR has changed: it emerged from international isolation and became a recognized great power. The number of countries with which the USSR had diplomatic relations increased from 26 to 52 compared to the pre-war period. It became one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, along with the USA, Britain, France and China. The Great Powers recognized the right of the USSR to part of East Prussia, South Sakhalin, its dominant position in China and North Korea. The Yalta and Potsdam agreements recognized the interests of the USSR in Eastern Europe.
However, with the disappearance of the fascist threat, more and more contradictions began to appear between the former allies. The clash of their geopolitical interests soon led to the collapse of the coalition and the creation of hostile blocs. Allied relations persisted until about 1947. However, already in 1945. serious contradictions were revealed, primarily in the struggle for the division of influence in Europe. Against the backdrop of heightened disagreements, Churchill ordered Field Marshal Montgomery to collect German weapons to arm the prisoners in case the Russians continued their advance into the West.
The highest military and intelligence agencies of the United States dramatically changed their assessment of the military potential of the USSR and began to develop plans for a future war. In the directive of the Joint Military Planning Committee of December 14, 1945. No. 432/D outlined a plan for the bombardment of the main industrial centers of the USSR. In particular, 20 Soviet cities were supposed to drop 196 atomic bombs. At the same time, the former allies referred to the refusal of the USSR to fulfill the Yalta and Potsdam agreements, to the threat from the Red Army, located in the center of Europe. Churchill 5 March 1946 in the city of Fulton (USA), in the presence of President Truman, for the first time openly accused the USSR of having fenced off Eastern Europe with an "Iron Curtain", called for organizing pressure on Russia in order to obtain from it both foreign policy concessions and changes in domestic policy . It was a call for an open and tough confrontation with the Soviet Union. A year later, Truman officially announced US commitments in Europe to curb Soviet expansion and led the West's fight against the Soviet Union.
Indeed, there is evidence from V.M. Molotov that Stalin deliberately refused to fulfill some of the allied obligations of the USSR. Stalin decided to use the victory in the war to realize the age-old Russian dream - the capture of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. The USSR demanded that Turkey transfer the provinces of Kare and Ardagan to it, and allow it to build a naval base near the straits. Danger also loomed over Greece, where a civil war was going on and communist partisans were trying to seize power. With American support, the Greek government crushed the communist uprising, and Turkey rejected the Soviet demands.
The main attention of the Soviet leadership was focused on putting together a socialist bloc in Europe. The creation of a socialist camp was considered the main achievement after the October Revolution. Using the insufficient firmness of the positions of the West, Stalin sought to establish his influence primarily in Eastern Europe. In these countries, communist parties were supported, and the leaders of the opposition were eliminated (often physically). Therefore, the Eastern European countries were dependent on the USSR, under its control they pursued their foreign and domestic policies (with the exception of Yugoslavia). In them in 1945 - 1947. coalition governments existed, then they were forcibly replaced by communist power. Only the leader of Yugoslavia, I.B. Tito, behaved differently. At one time he led the struggle of the Yugoslav people against the fascist occupation, created powerful armed forces, without refusing to fight and from Soviet assistance. Being popular, Tito himself sought to reign supreme in the Balkans and did not want to submit to Stalin's dictatorship. Moreover, he began to build socialism of a non-Soviet model: his socialism was based not on total state ownership (as was the case in the USSR), but on the self-management of enterprises. Stalin achieved the unanimous condemnation of Tito by the communist countries and parties as a revisionist, "agent of imperialism" in 1949. severed diplomatic and trade relations with Yugoslavia, forcing his allies to do the same. But he could not remove Tito, although he boasted to his comrades-in-arms: if you move your little finger, Tito will not be. It was one of the few episodes in Stalin's career when he was defeated by failing to take revenge on the successful Yugoslav leader.
The Soviet-Yugoslav conflict had the consequence that the myth of the monolithic unity of communist ranks and ideas collapsed. In an attempt to prevent the emergence of new heresies and continuing to promote the Soviet model of socialism, Stalin organized high-profile political trials of prominent party and statesmen satellite countries. Such leaders as V. Gomulka in Poland, L. Raik and J. Kadar in Hungary, T. Kostov in Bulgaria, J. Klementis and R. Slansky in Czechoslovakia, A. Tauker in Romania. The purpose of the purges was to eliminate those who allowed the slightest hesitation, replacing them with those who unconditionally supported the policy of the USSR. The establishment of socialist orders cost these countries dearly: more than 120 thousand people were repressed in East Germany (1945-1950), in Poland (1944-1948) - about 300 thousand, Czechoslovakia (1948-1954) - about 150 thousand
The formation of the Soviet bloc went in parallel with the intensification of confrontation with the West. The turning point was 1947, when the Soviet leadership refused to participate in the Marshall Plan and forced other Eastern European countries to do the same. United States in June 1947 put forward a plan to help European states in the amount of 13 billion dollars, the vast majority free of charge. The Marshall Plan formally extended to the USSR and was at first favorably received by the Soviet leaders, who expected to receive assistance on the terms of lend-lease. However, it soon became clear that the Americans insisted on the creation of supranational bodies that would identify the resources of countries and determine their needs. This did not suit the USSR, and it refused to participate in the Marshall Plan and did not allow its satellites to accept it. Western European states accepted him with gratitude. American assistance gave a powerful impetus to the almost crisis-free post-war development of the economy of Western Europe.
To tighten control over his allies, Stalin in (September 1947 established the Information Bureau of Communist and Workers' Parties - Cominform (he dissolved the Comintern in 1943, hoping that this would contribute to the opening of a second front). The Cominform included Eastern European Communist Parties and from Western - Italian and French.In 1949, the socialist countries formed the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) as an alternative to the Marshall Plan.However, the closeness, lack of a real market, free flow of capital did not allow the CMEA countries to achieve economic proximity and integration, as was the case in the West.
The formed socialist bloc of countries led by the USSR was opposed by the union of the countries of Western Europe and North America led by the United States, which, with the creation in 1949. NATO has finally taken shape. The tough confrontation between the West and the East contributed to the "correction" of the domestic policy of the leading powers. In 1947 under the influence of the US ruling circles, the communists were removed from the governments of Italy and France. In the United States itself, a test of the loyalty of civil servants began, lists of "subversive organizations" were drawn up, whose members were expelled from work. Communists and people of leftist views were especially persecuted. In June 1947 The US Congress approved the Taft-Hartley Act, which restricted strike and trade union movements.
The confrontation took on more and more dangerous outlines, and in the late 40s, Germany turned out to be the main arena of struggle. The United States began to send economic assistance to the zones of occupation of Western countries, seeking to create a democratic and friendly state in them. Stalin tried to thwart this plan, fearing a resurgence of German power. He exploited the vulnerability of West Berlin, which was inside the Soviet zone of occupation. On June 24, 1948, following the introduction of the West German currency in the western sectors of the city, Soviet troops cut the roads leading to West Berlin. For a whole year, the United States and Great Britain supplied the city by air bridge, until Stalin lifted the blockade. By and large, the blockade only damaged Soviet interests: it contributed to the re-election for a second term of Truman, who showed firmness towards the USSR, the victory of the democratic parties in the elections in West Germany and West Berlin and the proclamation in these territories in September 1949. the Federal Republic of Germany, the formation of the NATO military bloc. In response to the formation of the Federal Republic of Germany, the USSR responded by creating in October 1949. German Democratic Republic in its zone of occupation. So Germany was divided into two states.
The division of Europe ended in the West. It became obvious that Stalin's attempts to further expand his sphere of influence here were repulsed. Now the center of confrontation has moved to Asia. In 1949 the Chinese Revolution won, even earlier the communist regime had established itself in North Korea. At the end of the 1940s, world socialism covered more than 1/4 of the entire earth's land mass and 1/3 of the world's population. Based on this circumstance, and also taking into account the presence of the communist movement in the countries of the West, the leaders of the Soviet bloc and China, apparently, were inclined to the opinion that it was possible to change the balance of power that had developed in the world in their favor. In February 1950, the leaders of the USSR and China signed an agreement on mutual assistance for a period of 30 years.
Further, Stalin organized an international adventure on a large scale on the Korean Peninsula. He played a decisive role in initiating the Korean War (1950-1953) in which more than a million people died on both sides. The war began with an attack by North Korea on South Korea. Despite this, communist propaganda claimed otherwise. However, the UN Security Council unmistakably stated "an armed attack on the Republic of Korea by North Korean troops." According to his decision, US troops and 15 other states intervened in the conflict under the UN flag.
Stalin did not want the Americans to convict him of preparing for war, but wanted only the Chinese to openly participate in the Korean War for the time being. He confirmed his readiness to arm 60 Chinese infantry divisions. Stalin gave the order to form a special corps to cover China and the North Koreans. In total, during the war in Korea, 15 Soviet aviation and several anti-aircraft artillery divisions received combat practice. There was a strict order: not a single adviser or pilot should be captured. On Soviet aircraft, the identification marks were Chinese, the pilots wore Chinese or Korean uniforms. Soviet pilots and anti-aircraft gunners shot down 1309 American aircraft. About 300 Soviet pilots and advisers were killed.
AT last years Stalin's life attracted the Bering Strait and Alaska. It was here that the active deployment of the armed forces of the USSR began. Since the beginning of the 50s, airfields and military bases have been created. In the spring of 1952 Stalin decided to urgently form 100 divisions of front-line jet bombers. Preparations for a new world war were unfolding in the immediate vicinity of the US borders. In the event of war, America was threatened with massive air strikes and invasion by ground forces. Humanity as a whole was on the verge of a third world war with monstrous consequences. Fortunately, Stalin's plans were not destined to come true, and his successors had a different vision in solving the problem of war and peace.
The Second World War led to fundamental changes in the world and international relations. Fascist Germany and Italy, militarist Japan were defeated, war criminals were punished, and an international organization, the United Nations, was created. All this demonstrated the relative unity of the victorious powers.
The war led to drastic changes on the world map. First of all, the United States has grown enormously in economic, military and political terms. The US has become the leader of the Western world.
The military and political influence of the USSR increased significantly. The economic devastation caused by the war was offset by military and political advantages. On the whole, the position of the USSR has changed: it has emerged from international isolation and has become a recognized great power.
However, with the disappearance of the fascist threat, more and more contradictions began to appear between the former allies. The clash of their geopolitical interests soon led to the collapse of the coalition and the creation of hostile blocs. Allied relations persisted until approximately 1947. However, already in 1945, serious contradictions were revealed, primarily in the struggle for influence in Europe.
W. Churchill March 5, 1946 in the city of Fulton (USA), in the presence of President G. Truman, for the first time openly accused the USSR of having fenced off Eastern Europe with an "Iron Curtain", called for organizing pressure on Russia in order to obtain from it both foreign policy concessions and changes in internal politics. It was a call for an open and tough confrontation with the Soviet Union. A year later, Truman officially announced US commitments in Europe to curb Soviet expansion and led the West's fight against the Soviet Union.
The main attention of the Soviet leadership was focused on putting together a socialist bloc in Europe. The formation of the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe went hand in hand with the intensification of confrontation with the West. The turning point was 1947, when the Soviet leadership refused to participate in the "Marshall Plan" (which concerned the economic recovery of Europe) and forced other Eastern European countries to do the same.
In 1949, Germany split into two states - the GDR and the FRG. In the same year, a NATO bloc was created under the auspices of the United States. The USSR responded to this with an alternative to the "Marshall Plan" - the creation of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), which operated in Eastern Europe, and the creation of the Warsaw Pact Organization (OVD).
The confrontation between the two blocs unfolded both in Europe (the Berlin Crisis of 1948) and in Asia (the victory of the Communists in China in 1949, the Korean War of 1950-1953, the beginning of decolonization).
43. "Cold War": concept, causes, stages
The term "cold war" belonged to the American diplomat D.F. Dulles and was mentioned in 1947. He defined the Cold War as the art of brinkmanship. There are different points of view regarding the date of its beginning (the death of F. Roosevelt, the use of atomic weapons, the speech of W. Churchill in Fulton in March 1946). The Cold War was largely the result of a misunderstanding of the plans of the parties. I.V. Stalin believed that imperialism breeds wars. Since it persists, a third world war is inevitable. At the same time, the Cold War suited both sides: the USSR consolidated its dominance in Eastern Europe, and the United States asserted its leadership in Western Europe, investing money in it for restoration.
1946 - 1953 Relations between the USSR and the USA became tense already in the spring and summer of 1947, during the beginning of the implementation of the Marshall Plan. Under pressure from the USSR, the Eastern European countries refused to participate in this plan. In 1948-1949. The Berlin crisis broke out, caused by the unwillingness of both sides to agree on the German question. Ultimately, this led to the creation of two German states, and then to the formation of the military-political blocs of NATO (1949) and the Warsaw Pact (1955). In parallel, the formation of people's democracy regimes was going on in the Eastern European countries.
1953 - 1962 During this period of the Cold War, the world was on the brink of nuclear conflict. Despite some improvement in relations between the USSR and the USA in the mid-1950s, it was at this stage that the anti-communist uprising in Hungary (1956), unrest in the GDR (1953) and Poland (1956), as well as the Suez Crisis (1956) took place. ). This period of relations between the superpowers ended with the Berlin and Caribbean crises of 1961 and 1962, respectively.
1962 - 1979 The period was marked by an arms race that undermined the economies of rival countries. Despite the presence of tension in relations between the USSR and the USA, agreements on the limitation of strategic weapons are signed. A joint space program "Soyuz-Apollo" is being developed. However, by the beginning of the 80s, the USSR began to lose in the arms race.
1979 - 1987 Relations between the USSR and the USA are again aggravated after the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In 1983 the United States deployed ballistic missiles at bases in Italy, Denmark, England, the FRG, and Belgium. An anti-space defense system is being developed.
1987 - 1991 M. Gorbachev's coming to power in the USSR in 1985 entailed not only global changes within the country, but also radical changes in foreign policy, called "new political thinking". A number of disarmament agreements are being concluded between the USSR and the USA. The collapse of the USSR in 1991 meant the end of the Cold War.
| " |