Ideological confrontation during the Cold War. Superpower Rivalry and Disarmament Policy during the Cold War. Military confrontation between the superpowers

Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation

Ministry of Education of the Republic of Tajikistan

Russian-Tajik (Slavonic) University

Department International relationships

Course work

« Cold War ": ideological and geopolitical factors of its emergence

Completed: 3rd year student

Groups "A"

Dushanbe - 2010

Introduction

A significant place in the history of international relations of the second half of the XX century. occupies a period known as the Cold War. This term characterizes the hostile policy towards the Soviet Union and other countries that were part of the socialist system. The Cold War was a sharp confrontation between the two systems on the world stage. It became especially acute in the late 40s - 60s. There was a time when the severity subsided somewhat, and then intensified again. The Cold War covered all spheres of international relations: political, economic, military and ideological.

The complex, ambiguous and contradictory events of the second half of the 19th century, which make up the content of the Cold War, still cause the most heated polemics among historians, political scientists, and specialists in international relations. There is still no consensus even about whether the "cold war" is over, all the more contradictory opinions about its causes and conditions. The consequences of the Cold War are of great importance not only for its two main participants - the United States and the already vanished USSR - its results are important for the whole world as a historical example of a confrontation between superpowers on the brink of a nuclear war that can lead to irreversible catastrophic consequences. Today, when the United States is once again striving for world domination, for the creation of a unipolar world and the subordination of other superpowers to itself, the world is again in danger of war. The United States has already crossed the line of war and peace, this fragile watershed. In such conditions, it is all the more urgent to study the causes and origins of the cold war, its course and results, as well as the prospects for the further development of international relations.

Historiography on this issue is conditionally subdivided into foreign, Soviet during the Cold War and Russian contemporary literature. All Soviet and foreign historiography of the Cold War period is permeated with essentially different ideologies - socialist and capitalist - and boils down to the fact that it does not give a complete and objective picture of the causes of the Cold War. The view of modern Russian historians is completely different; they try to approach the study of the problem impartially. We must also take into account the fact that previously unknown documents and materials from archives have been introduced into scientific circulation, shedding new light on many pages of the Cold War. Modern domestic authors covering this problem are L.N. Nezhinsky, G. Murashko, A. Noskova, A. Orlov, A. Flitov, a team of these authors created the monograph "Soviet foreign policy during the Cold War" (1945-1985) ", established in 1995. The purpose of this work is to study the "cold war" as a manifestation of international relations between east and west. The object of the research is the international relations between the main opponents in the Cold War, as well as their tactical and strategic methods and means of participation in the Cold War. The subject of the research was the sources and documents testifying to the diplomatic, strategic and tactical actions of the opponents in the Cold War. Structurally, the course work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and a list of accepted abbreviations. The first chapter of the course work analyzes the beginning of the Cold War - the confrontation between the two systems on the world stage; the second chapter is an analysis of international relations during the Cuban missile crisis as a turning point of the Cold War; the third chapter outlines the geopolitical transformation of international relations since the end of the Cold War.

Chapter 1. The beginning of the cold war - the confrontation between the two systems on the world stage

1. The concept of the Cold War

The Cold War is a period in the development of international relations that lasted almost 40 years after the end of World War II. The essence of the Cold War was the political, military-strategic and ideological confrontation between the countries of the capitalist and socialist systems. The Cold War engulfed the entire planet. It split the world into two parts, two military-political and economic groupings, two socio-political systems. The world has become bipolar, bipolar.

The fundamental opposition of the two world systems (capitalist and socialist), economic, political, ideological differences between them led to the following:

1 The desire of each system to strengthen its influence in the world, to spread it to new countries and peoples.

2. The policy of implanting the warring countries with their values, their own order (order) in new territories.

3. The readiness of each of the parties to defend their positions by all possible means (economic, political, military).

4. The policy of threats, already in the first post-war decade, led to mutual distrust, the formation by each side of the "enemy image".

2. The origins of the confrontation

The Cold War began shortly after the end of World War II, when the Allies began to take stock of it. The allies emerged from this war so strong, and the means of warfare became so destructive that it became clear that it was too much of a luxury to sort things out using the old methods. Nevertheless, the coalition partners did not diminish the desire to exterminate the opposing side. To a certain extent, the initiative to start the Cold War belongs to the Western countries, for which the power of the USSR, which became evident during the Second World War, turned out to be a very unpleasant surprise. First, half of Europe found itself in the Soviet zone of influence, and pro-Soviet regimes emerged feverishly there. Secondly, a powerful wave of the liberation movement arose in the colonies against the metropolises. Third, the world was quickly polarizing and turning into a bipolar one. Fourth, two superpowers were formed on the world stage, whose military and economic might gave them a significant superiority over others. Plus, the interests of Western countries in various parts of the world are beginning to clash with the interests of the USSR.

Formally, the anti-Hitler coalition retained its existence.

In practice, more and more deepening contradictions between the USSR and its Western partners were revealed. Stalin claimed a leading role, constantly emphasizing that as the main winner of fascism and the main victim of fascism, the USSR has more rights in resolving issues of the post-war system, especially in Europe and Asia. There was an active expansion of communist influence in the countries controlled by the USSR, as well as the growth of the influence of the communists in Western Europe. In Poland and Greece, there was a civil war between communists and anti-communist forces. Finally, Stalin made territorial claims to neighboring countries: he demanded from Turkey the Kars region and a military base in the straits. At the same time, in the West, the broad masses, as well as in liberal and socialist-minded circles, remained confident that friendly and allied relations with the USSR that had developed during the war could be maintained.

3. Winston Churchill's Fulton Speech - Formal Declaration of the Cold War

Churchill realized the new state of the world that emerged after World War II faster than others when he proclaimed the Cold War. On March 5, Churchill arrived at Fulton, where he was given a triumphant meeting. On the train, Churchill completed and edited the text of his speech, which took up 50 small sheets. He gave the text to Truman, who called the speech "excellent": in his words, "although it will cause confusion, it will only lead to positive results." At the same time, Truman did not officially express his attitude to Churchill's thoughts and appeals: Churchill, as a private person, had great freedom of action,

Truman, however, reserved the opportunity to disown the content of the speech if something happened, attributing it to Churchill's private opinion. In this sense, the Fulton speech was distinctly provocative, designed to sound out and stir up public opinion.

“We cannot close our eyes to the fact that the freedoms that citizens have in the United States, in the British Empire, do not exist in a significant number of countries, some of which are very strong. In these countries, control over ordinary people is imposed from above through various kinds of police governments to such an extent that it contradicts all the principles of democracy. The only instrument capable of preventing war and resisting tyranny at this historical moment is the “fraternal association of English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and the Empire and the United States of America. "

Introduction

2.1 Position of the USSR

2.2 US position

Conclusion

Introduction

The Cold War is a geopolitical, economic and ideological confrontation between blocs of countries led by the USSR and the United States, which determined the course of international relations throughout almost the entire second half of the 20th century. In its course, the Cold War had periods of detente and exacerbation; the last stage of confrontation was from the late 1970s to the mid-1980s. It was at this time that the conflict in relations between the parties reached a maximum and largely decided the outcome of the entire confrontation. These factors underline the relevance of this topic as the topic of the course work, as well as the fact that discussions about the meaning of the Cold War in general and this period in particular in the history of international relations continue. In addition, the relevance is emphasized by the provision that the events of the final stage of the Cold War played a decisive role in the nature of modern international relations.

The object of research is the relationship between the USSR and the United States, and the subject is the aggravation of the confrontation between these countries in the late 1970s - the first half of the 1980s.

To concretize the period under study, the following chronological framework is indicated: the end of 1979 (the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan) - the beginning of 1985 (the coming to power in the USSR of M.S.Gorbachev).

Thus, in this work, the goal is to identify the impact of the exacerbation of the Cold War in the late 1970s - early 1980s on international relations.

In accordance with the goal, the following tasks are set:

find out the reasons for the aggravation of the confrontation;

analyze the positions of the superpowers during this period of confrontation;

to mark the points of collision of powers.

america soviet arms race

To conduct the research, methods such as comparative analysis and document analysis are used.

Sources for writing the work are presented by anthologies on the history of the USSR and Russia, where documents are given that characterize the domestic and foreign policy of the country, its position in relation to international processes in the period under study; a collection of documents edited by A. Bogaturov provides information not only on the USSR, but also on other countries, including the United States, and also provides the texts of the main international agreements. Analytics on this issue are presented by the works of A. Utkin, L. Mlechin, A. Shubin, A. Yakovlev and M. Kalashnikov. Despite the fact that all works are devoted to the same topic, the points of view of the authors differ significantly. For example, L. Mlechin and A. Utkin consider the "cold war" to be the biggest mistake and disaster in history, while A. Shubin, A. Yakovlev and M. Kalashnikov (the most radical of all authors) regard it as a policy directed to destroy the Soviet statehood. It should be noted that all analytical works are rich in factual material. However, despite this elaboration of the topic, these works do not consider the influence of the events of this period on international relations, focusing mainly on bilateral and domestic issues.

Also used for work are reference books on military history, and data from the specialized site "Cold War - the great confrontation of the superpowers"; these sources provide factual information on specific issues. In addition, information and biographical Internet sites are used as reference material.

1. The reasons for the aggravation of the confrontation between the USSR and the USA

On the way to elucidating the influence of the final stage of the Cold War on international relations of the indicated period, the first necessary task is to elucidate the reasons for the aggravation of the confrontation, which will help to understand more deeply the further course of events.

As mentioned above, the beginning of the exacerbation of the confrontation between the two superpowers is considered to be 1979, from the moment the units of the Soviet army were introduced into the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. However, this, of course, an important event objectively could not be the only reason for the intensification of confrontation, especially taking into account the so-called "relaxation of international tension" that took place after the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. As you know, "detente" helped to improve Soviet-American relations, led to the parties reaching a number of important agreements: the Agreement between the USSR and the United States to prevent nuclear war, the joint signing of the CSCE Final Act and the SALT II Treaty. However, despite all these positive developments in the development of bilateral relations, a new surge of hostility could not be avoided, therefore, for its start there should have been complex, complex reasons, as well as contradictions that the "detente" policy could not overcome. Arguing the powerlessness of "detente" to end the confrontation, one can recall such examples as the different perceptions by the parties of the "Final Act" (the USSR perceived it as a guarantee of the integrity of its borders, the West - as a serious advance towards strengthening human rights) or the ratification of SALT that never happened. -2.

So, the reasons could not arise instantly, they were the result of past actions and mistakes of the superpowers, the preservation of mutual claims and stereotypes in the military-political and other dimensions.

1.1 Expansion of the Soviet sphere of influence

The policy of "detente" helped to a large extent to ease the tension in the confrontation between the USSR and the United States in Europe; The leaderships of the sides somewhat softened their positions in relation to each other, but the events on the periphery, in the so-called "third world", brought about cardinal changes in the emerging order.

In 1961, a war of initially national liberation began in the Portuguese colony of Angola; however, the rebel forces quickly split into hostile groups and have already fought among themselves for power after secession from the Portuguese empire. This struggle has escalated greatly since the country's independence in 1975; a situation has developed in which the right-wing organizations supported by the West - UNITA, FNLA and FLEC united to fight the left-wing MPLA. The Soviet Union, seeing the prospect of obtaining a new ally in Africa and, as a result, strengthening its influence in the region, together with Cuba, actively began to provide assistance to the MPLA. In a short time, the USSR delivered many units of military equipment to Angola, sent military advisers, while Cuba landed a significant contingent of troops in Angola. All this contributed to the strengthening of the pro-Soviet regime in Luanda and allowed the USSR to get a new ally in the sphere of influence traditional for Western countries; In addition to Angola, Mozambique was another splinter of the Portuguese colonial empire that sided with the Soviet Union, which also received significant aid.

Another event that undermined the status quo in Africa was the 1974 revolution in Ethiopia that brought socialist leaders to power. And in this case, the USSR took a course to support the new regime. The Soviet Union did not refuse assistance to Ethiopia even when it had to make a choice: in 1977, the Ethiopian-Somali war began over the province of Ogaden; by the time it began, Somalia was also a fairly important partner of the USSR in the region, but the latter inclined to side with Ethiopia. Relations with Somalia were severed, but Soviet-Ethiopian cooperation was strengthened. Ethiopia, largely thanks to Soviet and Cuban assistance, won a victory over Somalia, in exchange for this, the USSR received strong points for its naval forces in the Red Sea, which occupied a strategically important position in the military and trade routes of Western countries.

Thus, the Soviet Union in a fairly short period of time received a number of allied states in Africa, significantly expanded its sphere of influence, which immediately caused a negative reaction from the West and, first of all, the United States.

1.2 Politico-military changes

Thus, the American government unofficially supported the pro-Chinese Pol Pot regime in Cambodia in its war with pro-Soviet Vietnam, and attempts were made by the United States to improve relations with the PRC. These actions ultimately failed, but their very existence speaks of attempts to compensate for the spheres of influence received by the USSR in Africa.

Another important "peripheral" event that influenced the further course of international relations was the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1978-1979. According to US President J. Carter, Iran was "an island of stability in a troubled region", an important stronghold of America for projecting its power and influence; after the revolution, Iran took openly anti-American positions, however, also anti-Soviet ones. The loss by the United States of an important and, in fact, the only (not counting the Arabian states) ally in the region, was a serious blow to their prestige and potential in the framework of the Cold War, which also prompted the American administration to adopt tougher and more suspicious positions in relation to the USSR ...

Speaking of the American administration, one cannot ignore its role in escalating the conflict. Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter have consistently moved away from the established by the early 70s. tendencies - to reduce the US military budget, and, on the contrary, actively engaged in building up power. The latest nuclear missile systems were urgently put into service, long-term plans to increase the nuclear submarine fleet were adopted, bombers carrying strategic bombs were re-equipped; an increase in the number of ground forces was even carried out, including in Europe. In addition, the doctrines of the possible conduct of hostilities were revised: under Ford, ballistic missiles were redirected from civilians to military and industrial facilities, which in the USSR was perceived as preparing the United States for a first strike; the Carter administration went further and increased the number of targets on the territory of the USSR and the ATS countries from 25 to 40 thousand, simultaneously increasing the military budget. Naturally, such actions did not contribute to the strengthening of peaceful relations between the superpowers, but, on the contrary, nullified the results of "detente".

Against this background, which began in 1977 by order of L.I. Brezhnev, the Soviet Union's re-equipping of its missile forces in the west of the country with RSD-10 "Pioneer" systems (SS-20 according to NATO classification) had a tremendous effect. European countries judged the emergence of these medium-range missiles as an immediate threat to their territory, the United States - to its military facilities in Europe. It will be fair to say that these actions of the Soviet leadership finally aggravated the current situation and led to the adoption of the so-called "NATO double decision" on December 12, 1979. According to this decision, it was planned to deploy Tomahawk cruise missiles in Europe, and to replace Pershing medium-range missiles with modernized Pershing-2 missiles.

This turn of events negatively affected the position of the USSR: it, striving to secure its territory with Pioneer missiles, found itself under attack from Pershing, whose flight time to Moscow was several times shorter than Soviet ballistic missiles to Washington. In this situation, the Soviet military leadership came to the conviction of the war preparing by the Americans and made the appropriate decisions: to place additional missiles on the territory of the GDR and Czechoslovakia, as well as to put forward strategic submarines as close as possible to the shores of the United States. The arms race has resumed on the broadest scale.

1.3 Afghanistan and ideological contradictions

Finally, the aforementioned entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan on December 27, 1979, was the decisive event that finally returned Soviet-American relations to confrontation. The Soviet government, which viewed this action as providing assistance to a friendly regime, did not take into account all the consequences: in the United States, the intervention in Afghanistan was perceived as creating a bridgehead for the subsequent occupation of the Persian Gulf countries, which would lead to a colossal energy shortage and the collapse of Western economies. Almost immediately after the start of the Soviet operation, President Carter put forward a new doctrine, which clearly outlined the position of the US government: means, including military force. " In addition, economic sanctions were imposed on the USSR, an embargo was announced on trade in various goods, including high-tech products.

Along with the aforementioned geopolitical contradictions, ideological conflicts continued to exist. For example, military aid to the countries of Africa and Afghanistan in the USSR was regarded as support for friendly regimes with the aim of building socialism in these countries; in this way the ideas of socialist internationalism were put into practice. In the West, however, any assistance by the Soviet Union to a third world country was perceived as a communist expansion and a desire to become a world hegemon; all this was reflected in public opinion, which was not in favor of the USSR. Also, a significant ideological contradiction was observed in the field of human rights: Western politicians accused the Soviet leadership of infringing on the freedoms of citizens, imposed sanctions on trade with the Soviet Union and its allies, the lifting of which required relaxation from the Soviet leadership in humanitarian matters. Human rights have thus become the subject of political blackmail. In general, we can say that ideological contradictions were not the main ones, but they did not contribute to the mutual improvement of relations and added tension to bilateral relations.

Summing up the results of this section, we can deduce the main reasons for the aggravation of the Cold War in the late 1970s. First of all, this reason is the growth of the military and geopolitical power of the USSR, the expansion of its sphere of influence and the simultaneous reduction of the sphere of influence of the United States, which upset the established strategic balance of power in the world. In an effort to protect their own interests, both superpowers increased the level of armaments, developed new doctrines, and thus continued to escalate the situation; any local conflict immediately began to take the form of a bilateral confrontation. Finally, ideological contradictions in the field of views on the development of the Third World countries and human rights exacerbated the already complex relations between the USSR and the United States. Under the influence of the confrontation between the two leading powers, international relations in the world became more and more tense.

2. The positions of the superpowers in the period of exacerbation of confrontation

New conditions in bilateral relations forced the parties to adapt to the current situation and build new or modify old strategic doctrines that expressed the positions of states during the aggravation of confrontation.

2.1 Position of the USSR

During the years of aggravation of confrontation, the Soviet Union in its foreign policy activities actually continued to use a number of principles that were formed back in the late 1960s. and in the West they received the name "Brezhnev Doctrine"; and although these principles were not officially enshrined in any document or act, they were the pillars of Soviet diplomacy.

The first of these was the principle of continuing the struggle against the imperialist countries, but this struggle was supposed to be peaceful, the main weapon of the USSR in it was to be the economy and ideology, and military power was to be the guarantor of security and the balance of power in the world. At the same time, the need for gradual mutual disarmament with the West and a withdrawal from the arms race was proclaimed; however, if the Western countries did not take the path of disarmament, then the possibility of a symmetrical growth of Soviet military power was envisaged (this point explained the deployment of additional weapons in Central Europe).

Another important aspect of foreign policy was the preservation of allied relations with the countries of the socialist camp and the involvement of the third world countries in the orbit of its influence, in order to avoid their transfer to the enemy's camp. This provision was implemented by the policy of "socialist internationalism", with the help of which the Soviet Union justified its military and economic assistance to states in different parts of the world, as well as interference in the internal affairs of the countries participating in the Internal Affairs Directorate, which was aimed at preserving the existing Europe of pro-Soviet regimes.

Foreign policy was also guided by the principle of the integrity and inviolability of the borders of the USSR, as well as the unacceptability of any power (primarily the United States) to conduct a dialogue with the Soviet Union from a position of strength. Cooperation, therefore, had to be carried out on equal rights and principles of parity, the same level of security.

Within the framework of these general provisions, the Soviet leadership also responded to the claims of the West after the start of the Soviet operation in Afghanistan and the general aggravation of relations. In particular, Leonid Brezhnev, in an interview with the Pravda newspaper correspondent, emphasized the peaceful aspirations of the USSR and accused the United States of the collapse of "detente", and also argued, in opposition to American statements, that the introduction of troops into the DRA was an exclusively humanitarian measure taken at the request of the government Afghanistan and in the name of establishing peace in this country and in no way aimed at expansion in the region. At the same time, the United States itself, according to Brezhnev, only contributed to the aggravation of the crisis by providing assistance to the Afghan rebels.

So, we can conclude that as part of the exacerbation of the Cold War in 1979, the Soviet Union did not accept any special military-political doctrines, but continued to use well-established principles and firmly denied any accusations of the West for hegemonic aspirations. The continuation of the old line of foreign policy can be explained, most likely, by the rather age cadre composition of the highest authorities, who are accustomed to being guided in their actions by proven methods and having difficulty adapting to constantly changing conditions.

2.2 US position

We have already spoken above about the "Carter Doctrine" and its provisions regarding relations with the USSR. With the advent of the Republicans led by R. Reagan to power in the United States in 1981, America's positions became even more radical and aggressive.

First of all, it is worth noting the attitude of the new administration towards the Soviet Union - Reagan and his team publicly set the goal of changing the political system in the USSR and winning the geopolitical confrontation. This is an indicative statement, which was a prelude to the formulation of a number of measures and principles used by Reagan to wage the Cold War.

Important in this row are the measures that Reagan considered necessary for carrying out within the country: firstly, a powerful psychological treatment of the population, and secondly, the reforming of the US economy (so-called "Reaganomics"). The propaganda was aimed at aggravating the image of the enemy in the face of the USSR in the minds of ordinary Americans and Europeans and creating the illusion of a strategic backwardness of the United States, which together pushed the population to support the republican administration; the goal of "Reaganomics" was to free up additional funds to intensify the arms race.

It was the involvement of the Soviet Union in a new arms race that the American government saw as the main means of struggle; at the same time, in the new race, the United States had to rely on new technologies, in many of which they were ahead of the USSR. Such actions were to be aimed at eliminating strategic parity and gaining advantages for the United States in the event of a nuclear war; on this basis, the concept of "decapitation" was even approved, i.e. the first nuclear strike by the United States with the aim of destroying the Soviet military and political leadership. This "decapitation", in fact, justified the hypothetical start of a global war by the United States and demonstrated their intentions to win in such a case.

Another important method of waging the Cold War, designed to weaken the Soviet Union, was the Reagan administration's choice of economic pressure. Primary in it was the limitation of the USSR's acquisition of new technologies, especially those related to the production of hydrocarbon fuels; for the American ruling circles, this was especially important in connection with the construction in the Soviet Union, together with the Europeans, of the Urengoy-Western Europe pipeline. Its opening would mean a new influx of funds into the USSR, so Reagan considered it necessary to prevent the commissioning of this hydrocarbon artery as much as possible. The practice of technological misinformation and even the supply of defective spare parts for industrial products was also declared quite acceptable. Economic pressure could also be manifested by a ban on the sale of other products, such as grain or consumer goods.

In addition to all this, Reagan and his team firmly set the goal of conducting a dialogue with the USSR from a position of strength, moving away from the established principles of the equality of superpowers in international relations and placing the Soviet Union in a subordinate position, turning negotiations into an arena of confrontation that could strike at the prestige of the USSR. To strengthen this position, the United States declared it necessary to strengthen its influence on the allies, to make them loyal followers of anti-Soviet policies, to act as a united front against any manifestation of the "Soviet threat", forcing them to firmly follow Washington's decisions.

With regard to the countries of the "third world", the idea was put forward to assist all anti-communist and pro-Western forces, to provide them with all kinds of economic and military support, including those that were on the territory of the USSR's sphere of influence. It was considered important to achieve allied relations with countries - suppliers of raw materials, which would provide the United States with a high level of energy security and would make it possible to influence oil prices. Also, the goal was to get closer to China (while maintaining relations with Japan and Taiwan), try to strengthen market trends in it and jointly exert pressure on the USSR in the Far East.

This was the position of the United States in the circumstances; quite clear is its firm anti-Soviet orientation, the complexity of measures and the desire at any cost (even through a preventive war) to win the confrontation.

Comparing the positions of the two main actors of the Cold War, one can draw conclusions about the completely different orientation of their political doctrines: in the USSR it was the preservation of the status quo in strategic terms with the simultaneous retention and expansion of the sphere of influence, in the USA it was an aggressive course to achieve an advantage over rival and even his possible liquidation, for which all Washington's leverage was mobilized. It can be concluded that the influence of the American program on international relations was higher, since it provided for active offensive actions on a number of points and involved a wide variety of forces in the political game; the Soviet strategy remained rather limited and did not provide for both flexible solutions for confronting the enemy, and a possible victory in the confrontation. Perhaps this somewhat defeatist view of confrontation by Soviet leaders diminished the USSR's chances of repelling the Reagan administration's offensive.

3. Points of collision of superpowers

The confrontation between the USSR and the United States during the final stage of the Cold War, as in previous periods, had vivid manifestations at various levels of international politics. The most indicative of these manifestations in this time period can be considered the aggravation of the arms race and the related events and contradictions of the superpowers in regional and local crises.

3.1 A new stage in the arms race

As mentioned in the previous sections, both sides by the end of the 70s. significantly increased their military potential and relied on their further build-up; This was especially true for the United States, which began to seriously consider the possibility of delivering a first strike without retaliation from the USSR.

The Reagan administration, having freed up new means by economic reforms, began an unprecedented large-scale military construction and modernization of the US armed forces, the introduction of new weapons systems and methods of warfare.

There was a colossal increase in military spending, each year their share in the country's budget steadily increased. Washington's main attention was paid to the development of strategic forces that could provide complete superiority over similar forces of the USSR.

In accordance with this strategy, first of all, there was a change of generations of ballistic missiles in the US troops; MX missiles with 10-split warheads and missiles with a single Minuteman warhead were put into operation. Due to the multiple warhead, a significant increase in the number of nuclear shells was achieved. The strategic forces of the navy were also being built up: in addition to the existing Polaris-class submarines, 12 Trident submarines were built, each of which carried 336 (!) Nuclear warheads; at the same time, due to the use of the latest achievements in optics and electronics, the accuracy of hitting the target was achieved up to 50 meters with a range of 11 thousand kilometers. The broadest modernization of the air force was carried out, completely new at that time stealth bombers were created and put into operation. Thousands of highly accurate and stealthy cruise missiles were added to the standard strategic weapons, which, in conjunction with the equally accurate and much more powerful Pershing-2 nuclear missiles, were supposed to be on alert in Europe.

In the field of conventional weapons, gigantic changes have also taken place: the number of ground forces was significantly increased (by almost 200 thousand people), armada of Abrams tanks (about 7000 units), new fighter-interceptors (about 8000 units), many new ships entered service Navy, including nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers.

The crown of the military program of the Republican administration was the so-called Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI. The essence of this program consisted in the construction of a number of stations and satellites in low-earth orbit, equipped with tracking systems and laser installations; such a system would have to fully protect the United States from ballistic missiles, destroying them on approach, and would provide a first strike capability by the United States. And although many modern researchers consider this program still unlikely and was used as a psychological weapon, it had rather serious consequences: in Moscow, this caused serious fears of being unable to retaliate. This fear, in turn, forced the Soviet Union to seek symmetrical responses to SDI and spend huge sums on this item of defense spending as well; in fact, this was most likely the goal of the American program aimed at depleting the Soviet economy in a high-tech arms race.

The buildup of American military power was accompanied by the waging of an "economic war" against the USSR. The concept of economic pressure described above was put into practice: special directives prohibited the transfer of strategic equipment and technologies to the Soviet Union, "industrial misinformation" was sold, pressure on European allies to join the economic blockade increased. Bankers were persuaded not to give loans to the USSR with low interest rates, or to stop issuing loans altogether.

However, even in such difficult conditions, the Soviet Union strove to maintain strategic equality. The latest missile systems of various ranges were adopted, aviation was improved, submarines of the Typhoon type were built (similar in class to the Trident boats), and the power of the already huge ground forces was built up. Hard work was going on on issues related to the creation of weapons against SDI. In 1984, the Temp-S medium-range missiles were deployed in the German Democratic Republic and Czechoslovakia. But such a large-scale construction in the field of armaments, against the backdrop of ever-expanding aid to the allied regimes, sanctions imposed by Western countries, and falling oil exports, became an ordeal for the Soviet economy. Military expenditures required more and more financial resources, the supply of which in the country was steadily declining; at the same time, civilian sectors of the economy were deprived of injections, which aggravated the technological backwardness of industry and negatively affected the standard of living of the population. Thus, what the Reagan administration was striving for happened - the arms race weakened the Soviet Union more and more, depleted its resources, and, accordingly, its geopolitical position and reduced the chances of winning the confrontation.

In addition to the adoption of new types of weapons and the improvement of old ones, there was a constant demonstration of strength on both sides, expressed in the conduct of large-scale military exercises on the border between the blocs. So, after September 1, 1983, the Soviet air defense shot down a South Korean passenger Boeing, which illegally entered the airspace of the USSR (this moment is considered the apogee of the confrontation period), in October-November, NATO forces carried out maneuvers that worked out the actions of the army in in the event of a war with the Soviet Union. In response, the OVD exercises were carried out on an equally large scale, designed to show the readiness to "meet with dignity" the enemy. Such intimidating actions became one of the elements of psychological warfare and kept the parties in constant tension.

However, for all the scale of the arms race that took place, one should not forget about attempts to defuse tensions. Such attempts were made by the Soviet Union, which really feared the start of a nuclear war by the Americans and was interested in weakening the pressure on its own economy. Yuri Andropov, having come to power, carried out his so-called "peaceful offensive" - ​​he proposed withdrawing all Soviet and American medium-range missiles from Europe, and also proposed compromises on regional conflicts. But Washington did not accept these proposals, citing their insincerity, and then headed a course towards toughening its policy towards the USSR; It is significant that shortly after the announcement of the peace initiatives of the Soviet leadership, R. Reagan called the Soviet Union an "evil empire." Attempts to end the arms race by treaty have failed.

It can be concluded that the arms race was the most striking manifestation of the new period of confrontation; at the same time, it had the goal of not only achieving a strategic advantage of one side over the other, but also, on the part of the United States, was to become an important step towards the complete elimination of the rival. As subsequent events showed, the arms race and the accompanying economic clashes really negatively affected the position of the USSR and accelerated the process of its weakening and subsequent disintegration. At the same time, the arms race became a difficult test for the economies of both superpowers, which in the early 1980s were in rather crisis conditions, but due to the bulkiness and inefficiency, as well as the apparent technological backwardness, the Soviet Union suffered much more; this affected all areas, from general economic indicators to the shortage of consumer goods. The United States, having carried out large-scale reforms, managed to significantly increase its military power, which, being created in the late 70s - 80s, still allows them to impose their own interests around the globe.

3.2 Local and regional crises

As mentioned above, the period of aggravation of confrontation was characterized not only by an arms race, economic and political rivalry, but also by a number of confrontations associated with conflicts in the zones of influence of countries. Such crises were the events in Afghanistan, Poland and Central America.

By deploying troops to Afghanistan, the Soviet leaders hoped to wage a quick, victorious war and strengthen the pro-Soviet regime in the country. However, the war began to drag on, the Soviet Union was losing lives and huge economic resources. Waging war with partisan detachments in mountainous conditions became a difficult task for the Soviet Army trained for all-out offensives to the west. Military operations managed to destroy the rebel bases, but soon they reappeared in the same places. The Mujahideen relied on camps in Pakistan, where they could receive reinforcements and, with renewed strength, engage in battle with Soviet and government forces.

It was Pakistan that became the main point of support for the guerrilla movement in Afghanistan. Soon after the outbreak of hostilities, the rulers of Saudi Arabia, frightened by the possibility of a Soviet invasion, began to provide active military and financial assistance to the Mujahideen. In these aspirations, they were supported by the American government, which saw in the Afghan war not only a threat to its interests, but also an opportunity to weaken the Soviet Union; in addition, the PRC provided assistance to the rebels. The USSR tried to reach an agreement with Pakistan on its refusal to support anti-government forces, but Pakistan, under the influence of the West, did not agree to an agreement. Meanwhile, the Mujahideen were receiving weapons paid for by Western countries, including anti-aircraft missile and artillery systems; thousands of tons of military supplies entered Afghanistan through Pakistani territory; American intelligence carried out operational transmission of satellite images showing the position of Soviet troops to the Mujahideen. Using the flow of military aid, the partisans offered stubborn resistance to the Soviet troops.

The Reagan administration, seeing the benefits of this situation for itself, actively stimulated support for the Mujahideen, and also made plans to conduct sabotage operations in Central Asia with the possible transfer of hostilities there. All this, combined with international pressure and the growing internal discontent with the war that began, played a significant role in the fact that the Soviet Union finally got bogged down in the quagmire of the civil war in Afghanistan. It put additional pressure on the Soviet economy, demanded the diversion of huge resources and influenced the decline in the international prestige of the USSR.

Another crisis in the Soviet zone of influence was the situation in Poland. In the early 1980s. there broke out a government crisis associated with the struggle for power in the upper echelons, and an economic crisis caused by the general recession in the economy in the 70s. Poland, which had received many Western loans, now had to pay them back, but the funds for this at the disposal of the Polish government were not available. Then, in order to avoid default in the country of the socialist community, Moscow began to pay the debts of Warsaw. This provided an additional burden on the Soviet economy, which in the light of the confrontation was beneficial to the United States. The population's dissatisfaction with the fall in living standards, as well as the restriction of political freedoms, also grew stronger. Workers' strikes, meetings, demonstrations began to take place; by the fall of 1980, the Solidarity association was created, aimed, in fact, at the destruction of the socialist order in the country. The situation was complicated by the election of Pope John Paul II of the Pole Karol Wojtyła. The situation in Poland became more and more critical, in December 1981 martial law was introduced; in Moscow, the possibility of introducing Soviet troops into Poland was considered. In such conditions, having reached an agreement with John Paul II, the American ruling circles were able to establish, through unofficial channels, support for Solidarity and other opposition movements; in addition, the United States and its allies have demonstratively begun the delivery of humanitarian aid to Poland. As a result, the Polish crisis was nevertheless resolved peacefully, the government found compromises with Solidarity, but the authority of the USSR was finally undermined, the majority of the population not only in Poland, but also in other countries of Eastern and Central Europe began to have an extremely negative attitude towards the socialist system and orient themselves towards the West ; various liberal movements expanded, and the USSR and its allied regimes had to spend significant funds to fight them.

Another crisis of this time period is the Central American one. Its beginning can be considered the end of the 1970s, when the struggle of the population with the dictator Somoza, who enjoyed the support of the United States, began in Nicaragua. By 1979, the left-wing forces won a victory in the country, creating a new government and taking a course towards building socialism. Anti-government right-wing movements soon emerged in Nicaragua and soon began to receive American support. In turn, the government headed by D. Ortega began to receive assistance from the USSR and Cuba. The civil war, unleashed, in fact, by the efforts of the White House, which feared the emergence of a new pro-Soviet state in the Caribbean, gave the Soviet Union some opportunity to recoup accusations of aggression against Afghanistan.

Then, in October 1983, the American army, contrary to international law, invaded Grenada. They overthrew the left government that had come to power by legal means; the reason for the aggression was declared to be the fight against radical forces, which, having come to power, would want, together with Cuba, "to extend their regime to its neighbors in the Caribbean." However, in practice, the possibility of Cuban expansion was not very high, so the US actions were most likely aimed at intimidating the USSR in order to demonstrate Washington's readiness to take decisive action in the event of continued Soviet funding of Central American left movements.

The crises in Central America have turned many groups of the population against the United States; however, thanks to the tough actions of the American government, the revolutionary movements did not gain the wide scope that the USSR hoped for when providing assistance to the countries of the region. On the contrary, the provision of support to the new allies required more and more expenditures of much-needed funds for the Soviet Union to modernize the economy. The actions of the United States drew condemnation from European public opinion, but the fear of the USSR in the ranks of Western inhabitants remained much stronger.

Thus, it can be concluded that the main points of collision of the superpowers, which were the arms race and regional crises, contributed to the maintenance of general tension in international relations of that time; The USSR and the USA did not miss the opportunity to achieve a strategic advantage in one area or another. Compromises on the main problems were never found, the confrontation continued to consume the resources of both sides, simultaneously negatively affecting the world economy, trade, science and other industries. All these aspects had the most negative impact on the position of the Soviet Union and the socialist camp as a whole; the standard of living was falling, the discontent of the population, technological backwardness, backwardness in the standard of living grew. Unable to withstand the frantic pace of confrontation, the USSR was losing its influence and geopolitical positions; economic strain led to a departure from the course of confrontation and a general weakening of the country; with the coming to power in March 1985, M.S. Gorbachev's tensions gradually began to subside, but this could no longer save the Soviet Union from the soon ensuing disintegration.

Conclusion

In the course of the study, it was found that the reasons for the aggravation of the global confrontation between the USSR and the United States were, firstly, the expansion of the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union and the weakening of the positions of the United States, which violated the existing by the beginning of the 1970s. balance of power in the world; secondly, the contradictions between the two leading countries regarding human rights and the development of the Third World countries played a role. All this, combined with the coming to power in the United States of more radical politicians, led to the beginning of a new confrontation, increased tensions in the field of international relations.

A comparative analysis of the positions of the superpowers on issues of international relations made it possible to draw a conclusion about a more aggressive attitude of the American side, which was striving to win the confrontation at any cost; the Soviet side adhered to the concept of maintaining the status quo, while expanding its own sphere of influence. It is precisely this position of the United States that largely determined the extreme aggravation of relations with the USSR, not only along the "Soviet Union-West" line, but also in many other areas of world politics.

Finally, an analysis of the "arms race" and conflicts, in which both superpowers were directly or indirectly, led to certain conclusions: the "arms race" was a powerful economic weapon that accelerated the disintegration of the USSR; the conflicts of this time, for the most part, took place in one way or another under the control of one of the warring parties and were aimed at achieving a strategic advantage in some aspect. Any event in international relations was viewed in the context of the confrontation between the USSR and the United States, which increased the atmosphere of mistrust at that time.

So, in the conclusion it becomes clear about the enormous influence of the Cold War period from the late 70s to the mid 80s. to the entire system of international relations. The tough position of the parties (first of all, the American one), the constant expectation of the start of an atomic war, the incessant peripheral clashes made it impossible for the superpowers to compromise, and intensified confrontation in all directions. The disruption of economic, trade, technical and scientific ties between the West and the socialist camp hastened the process of disintegration of the latter, and had a negative impact on the standard of living of ordinary citizens. Finally, the exhausting "arms race" finally undermined the power of the Soviet Union and put it on the trajectory of collapse. She was also able to ensure the military hegemony of the United States already in our time, which became possible thanks to the main consequence of the final stage of the Cold War - the collapse of the Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations and the formation of a new, unipolar, led by the United States and its allies.

List of used literature

1.Reader on the history of Russia from ancient times to the present day. Tutorial. - Moscow: Prospect, 2000 .-- 592 p.

2.Reader on Russian history (1946 - 1995): Textbook for university students // Edited by A. Kiseleva, E. Shchagin. - Moscow: VLADOS, 1996 .-- 600 p.

.The Cold War is a great confrontation between the superpowers // # "justify">. A systemic history of international relations in four volumes. Volume IV. The documents 1945-2003 // Ed. A. Bogaturov. - Moscow: NOFMO, 2004 .-- 594 p.

.History of wars. Reference book // Edited by M. Aksenova. - Moscow: Avanta +, Astrel, 2007 .-- 640 p.

.Utkin A. World Cold War. - Moscow: Algorithm, Eksmo, 2005 .-- 393 p.

.Lavrenov S., Popov I. Soviet Union in local wars and conflicts. - Moscow: ACT, Astrel, 2003 .-- 778 p.

8.Ethiopian Revolution // Global Security // # "justify"> 9. Limarev V. A Brief History of Cambodia // History of Cambodia // # "justify">. Mlechin L. Cold War: Politicians, Generals, Scouts. - Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2011 .-- 574 p.

."Carter Doctrine" // Cold War - the great confrontation between the superpowers // # "justify">. Jackson-Vanik Amendment: Hit Human Rights With Trade // Internet newspaper "Zona.kz" // # "justify">. Geopolitical Doctrine of Brezhnev // Gromyko // # "justify">. Shubin A. From "stagnation" to reforms. USSR in 1977-1985 - Moscow: Rosspen, 2001 (Fragments) - 89 p.

.Yakovlev A. From Truman to Reagan. Doctrines and realities of the nuclear age. - Moscow: Young Guard, 1985 .-- 416 p.

.Kalashnikov M. Baptism with Fire: The Struggle of Giants. - Moscow: AST, Astrel, 2008 .-- 512 p.

.Reagan's speech on March 8, 1983 ("The Evil Empire") // Cold War - the great confrontation between the superpowers // http://www.coldwar.ru/raegan/evil_empire. php (Was available on 04/14/2012)

Tutoring

Need help exploring a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send a request with the indication of the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

The war is incredible
the world is impossible.
Raymond Aron

Modern relations between Russia and the collective West can hardly be called constructive, or even more so partner. Mutual accusations, loud statements, growing saber-rattling, and the fierce intensity of propaganda all create a lasting impression of déjà vu. All this once was and is being repeated now - but in the form of a farce. Today, the news feed seems to return to the past, during the epic confrontation between two powerful superpowers: the USSR and the United States, which lasted more than half a century and repeatedly brought humanity to the brink of a global military conflict. In history, this long-term confrontation has been called the Cold War. Historians consider it the beginning of the famous speech of the British Prime Minister (at that time already former) Churchill, delivered in Fulton in March 1946.

The Cold War era lasted from 1946 to 1989 and ended with what the current Russian President Putin called "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century" - the Soviet Union disappeared from the world map, and with it the entire communist system sank into oblivion. The confrontation between the two systems was not a war in the literal sense of the word, an obvious clash between the armed forces of the two superpowers was avoided, but the numerous military conflicts of the Cold War, which it generated in different regions of the planet, claimed millions of human lives.

During the Cold War, the struggle between the USSR and the United States was fought not only in the military or political sphere. Competition was no less intense in the economic, scientific, cultural and other fields. But the main one was still ideology: the essence of the Cold War is the most acute confrontation between two models of the state system: the communist and the capitalist.

By the way, the term "cold war" itself was introduced into circulation by the cult writer of the 20th century, George Orwell. He used it even before the start of the confrontation itself in his article "You and the Atomic Bomb." The article was published in 1945. Orwell himself in his youth was an ardent adherent of the communist ideology, but in his mature years he was completely disillusioned with it, so he probably understood the issue better than most. Officially, the term "cold war" was first used by the Americans two years later.

The Cold War was not limited to the Soviet Union and the United States. It was a global competition involving dozens of countries around the world. Some of them were the closest allies (or satellites) of the superpowers, while others were drawn into the confrontation by accident, sometimes even against their will. The logic of the processes required the parties to the conflict to create their own zones of influence in different regions of the world. Sometimes they were consolidated with the help of military-political blocs; NATO and the Warsaw Pact became the main alliances of the Cold War. On their periphery, in the redistribution of spheres of influence, the main military conflicts of the Cold War took place.

The described historical period is inextricably linked with the creation and development of nuclear weapons. Mainly, it was precisely the presence of this most powerful deterrent among the opponents that did not allow the conflict to go into a hot phase. The Cold War between the USSR and the USA gave rise to an unheard-of arms race: already in the 70s, the opponents had so many nuclear warheads that they would have been enough to destroy the entire globe several times. And that's not counting the huge arsenals of conventional weapons.

Over the decades of confrontation, there were both periods of normalization of relations between the United States and the USSR (detente), and times of tough confrontation. The crises of the Cold War have several times brought the world to the brink of global catastrophe. The most famous of these is the Cuban Missile Crisis, which occurred in 1962.

The end of the Cold War was rapid and unexpected for many. The Soviet Union lost the economic race with Western countries. The lag was already noticeable at the end of the 60s, and by the 80s the situation became catastrophic. A powerful blow to the national economy of the USSR was dealt by the fall in oil prices.

In the mid-1980s, it became clear to the Soviet leadership that something needed to be changed in the country immediately, otherwise a catastrophe would ensue. An end to the Cold War and the arms race were vital for the USSR. But perestroika, initiated by Gorbachev, led to the dismantling of the entire state structure of the USSR, and then to the collapse of the socialist state. Moreover, the United States, it seems, did not even expect such a denouement: back in 1990, American Sovietologists were preparing for their leadership a forecast of the development of the Soviet economy until 2000.

In late 1989, Gorbachev and Bush, during a summit on the island of Malta, officially announced that the Cold War was over.

The topic of the Cold War is very popular today in the Russian media. Commentators often use the term "new cold war" when talking about the current foreign policy crisis. Is it so? What are the similarities and differences between the current situation and the events of forty years ago?

Cold War: causes and prerequisites

After the war, the Soviet Union and Germany lay in ruins, during the hostilities, Eastern Europe also suffered a lot. The economy of the Old World was in decline.

On the contrary, the territory of the United States was practically not affected during the war, and the human losses of the United States were in no way comparable to the Soviet Union or Eastern European countries. Even before the outbreak of war, the United States had become the world's leading industrial power, and military supplies to the Allies further strengthened the American economy. By 1945, America had managed to create a new weapon of unheard of power - the nuclear bomb. All of the above allowed the United States to confidently count on the role of the new hegemon in the post-war world. However, it soon became clear that on the path to planetary leadership the United States had a new dangerous rival - the Soviet Union.

The USSR almost single-handedly defeated the strongest German ground army, but paid a colossal price for it - millions of Soviet citizens died at the front or during the occupation, tens of thousands of cities and villages lay in ruins. Despite this, the Red Army occupied the entire territory of Eastern Europe, including most of Germany. In 1945, the USSR undoubtedly had the strongest armed forces on the European continent. The positions of the Soviet Union in Asia were no less strong. Just a few years after the end of World War II, the communists came to power in China, which made this huge country an ally of the USSR in the region.

The communist leadership of the USSR never abandoned plans for further expansion and spreading its ideology to new regions of the planet. We can say that throughout almost its entire history, the foreign policy of the USSR was rather tough and aggressive. In 1945, especially favorable conditions arose for the advancement of communist ideology to new countries.

It should be understood that the Soviet Union was poorly understood by most American, and indeed Western politicians. A country where there is no private property and market relations, churches are blown up, and society is under the full control of the special services and the party, it seemed to them some kind of parallel reality. Even Hitler's Germany was somewhat more understandable to the average American. In general, Western politicians treated the USSR rather negatively even before the start of the war, and after its end, fear was added to this attitude.

In 1945, the Yalta Conference took place, during which Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt tried to divide the world into spheres of influence and create new rules for the future world order. Many modern scholars see the origins of the Cold War in this conference.

Summarizing the above, we can say: the cold war between the USSR and the United States was inevitable. These countries were too different to coexist peacefully. The Soviet Union wanted to expand the socialist camp to include new states, and the United States sought to rebuild the world in order to create more favorable conditions for its large corporations. Nevertheless, the main reasons for the Cold War are still in the field of ideology.

The first signs of a future Cold War appeared even before the final victory over Nazism. In the spring of 1945, the USSR made territorial claims against Turkey and demanded that the status of the Black Sea straits be changed. Stalin was interested in the possibility of creating a naval base in the Dardanelles.

A little later (in April 1945), British Prime Minister Churchill gave instructions to prepare plans for a possible war with the Soviet Union. He later wrote about this in his memoirs. At the end of the war, the British and Americans kept several Wehrmacht divisions undisturbed in case of a conflict with the USSR.

In March 1946, Churchill delivered his famous Fulton speech, which many historians regard as the trigger of the Cold War. In this speech, the politician called on Great Britain to strengthen relations with the United States in order to jointly repel the expansion of the Soviet Union. Churchill considered the growth of the influence of the communist parties in the states of Europe dangerous. He urged not to repeat the mistakes of the 30s and not to be led by the aggressor, but to firmly and consistently uphold Western values.

“… From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, across the entire continent, the Iron Curtain was drawn. Behind this line are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. (…) The communist parties, which were very small in all the eastern states of Europe, seized power everywhere and gained unlimited totalitarian control. (…) Police governments prevail almost everywhere, and so far, apart from Czechoslovakia, there is no real democracy anywhere. The facts are: this, of course, is not the liberated Europe we fought for. This is not what is necessary for a permanent peace ... "- this is how Churchill described the new post-war reality in Europe, undoubtedly the most experienced and perceptive politician in the West. The USSR did not like this speech very much, Stalin compared Churchill with Hitler and accused him of fomenting a new war.

It should be understood that during this period the front of confrontation of the Cold War often ran not along the external borders of countries, but inside them. The poverty of Europeans, ravaged by war, made them more susceptible to leftist ideology. After the war in Italy and France, the communists were supported by about a third of the population. The Soviet Union, in turn, did everything possible to support the national communist parties.

In 1946, Greek rebels became active, led by local communists, and supplied the Soviet Union with weapons through Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia. The uprising was suppressed only by 1949. After the end of the war, the USSR refused to withdraw its troops from Iran for a long time and demanded to grant him the right to protectorate over Libya.

In 1947, the Americans developed the so-called Marshall Plan, which provided for significant financial assistance to the states of Central and Western Europe. This program included 17 countries, the total amount of transfers was $ 17 billion. In exchange for money, the Americans demanded political concessions: the recipient countries had to expel the communists from their governments. Naturally, neither the USSR nor the countries of the "people's democracies" of Eastern Europe received any assistance.

One of the real "architects" of the Cold War can be called the Deputy American Ambassador to the USSR, George Kennan, who sent telegram No. 511 home in February 1946. It went down in history as the "Long Telegram". In this document, the diplomat acknowledged the impossibility of cooperation with the USSR and called on his government to toughly resist the communists, for, according to Kennan, the leadership of the Soviet Union respects only strength. Later, this document largely determined the position of the United States towards the Soviet Union for many decades.

In the same year, President Truman announced the "containment policy" of the USSR throughout the world, later called the Truman Doctrine.

In 1949, the largest military-political bloc, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was formed. It includes most of the countries of Western Europe, Canada and the United States. The main task of the new structure was to protect Europe from the Soviet invasion. In 1955, the communist countries of Eastern Europe and the USSR created their own military alliance, called the "Warsaw Pact Organization".

Stages of the Cold War

The following stages of the Cold War are distinguished:

• 1946 - 1953 The initial stage, which is usually considered the start of Churchill's speech at Fulton. During this period, the Marshall Plan for Europe is launched, the North Atlantic Alliance and the Warsaw Pact Organization are created, that is, the main participants in the Cold War are determined. At this time, the efforts of the Soviet intelligence and the military-industrial complex were aimed at creating their own nuclear weapons; in August 1949, the USSR tested its first nuclear bomb. But the United States for a long time retained a significant superiority both in the number of charges and in the number of carriers. In 1950, the war on the Korean Peninsula began, which lasted until 1953 and became one of the bloodiest military conflicts of the last century;
• 1953 - 1962 This is a very controversial period of the Cold War, during which there was a Khrushchev "thaw" and the Caribbean crisis, which almost ended in a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. These years saw the anti-communist uprisings in Hungary and Poland, the next Berlin crisis and the war in the Middle East. In 1957, the USSR successfully tested the first intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching US territory. In 1961, the USSR conducted demonstration tests of the most powerful thermonuclear charge in the history of mankind - the Tsar Bomb. The Cuban Missile Crisis led to the signing of several documents on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons between the superpowers;
• 1962 - 1979 This period can be called the apogee of the Cold War. The arms race reaches its maximum intensity, tens of billions of dollars are spent on it, undermining the economies of rivals. Attempts by the government of Czechoslovakia to carry out pro-Western reforms in the country were thwarted in 1968 by the introduction of troops of members of the Warsaw Pact into its territory. Tension in relations between the two countries, of course, was present, but Soviet Secretary General Brezhnev was not a fan of adventures, so acute crises were avoided. Moreover, in the early 70s, the so-called "relaxation of international tension" began, which somewhat reduced the intensity of the confrontation. Important documents were signed concerning nuclear weapons, and joint programs in space were being implemented (the famous Soyuz-Apollo). In the context of the Cold War, these were extraordinary events. However, the "detente" ended by the mid-1970s, when the Americans deployed medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe. The USSR responded by deploying similar weapons systems. Already by the mid-70s, the Soviet economy began to stall noticeably, and the USSR began to lag behind in the scientific and technical sphere;
• 1979 - 1987 Relations between the superpowers deteriorated again after Soviet troops entered Afghanistan. In response, the Americans staged a boycott of the Olympics, which was hosted by the Soviet Union in 1980, and began to help the Afghan mujahideen. In 1981, a new American president came to the White House - Republican Ronald Reagan, who became the most tough and consistent opponent of the USSR. It was with his submission that the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program began, which was supposed to protect the American territory of the United States from Soviet warheads. During the Reagan years, the United States began to develop neutron weapons, and appropriations for military needs increased significantly. In one of his speeches, the American president called the USSR an "evil empire";
• 1987 - 1991 This stage is the end of the Cold War. In the USSR, a new general secretary came to power - Mikhail Gorbachev. He began global changes within the country, radically revised the foreign policy of the state. Another discharge began. The main problem for the Soviet Union was the state of the economy, undermined by military spending and low energy prices - the state's main export product. Now the USSR could no longer afford to conduct a foreign policy in the spirit of the Cold War; it needed Western loans. In just a few years, the intensity of the confrontation between the USSR and the United States has practically disappeared. Important documents were signed concerning the reduction of nuclear and conventional arms. In 1988, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan began. In 1989, one after another, the pro-Soviet regimes in Eastern Europe began to "pour in", and at the end of the same year the Berlin Wall was broken. Many historians consider this event to be the real end of the Cold War era.

Why did the USSR lose in the Cold War?

Despite the fact that every year the events of the Cold War are farther from us, the topics related to this period are of increasing interest in Russian society. Domestic propaganda tenderly and carefully fosters the nostalgia of a part of the population for those times when "there were two or twenty sausages and everyone was afraid of us." Such, they say, the country was destroyed!

Why did the Soviet Union, with enormous resources, a very high level of social development and the highest scientific potential, lose its main war, the Cold War?

The USSR emerged as a result of an unprecedented social experiment to create a just society in a single country. Similar ideas appeared in different historical periods, but usually they remained just projections. The Bolsheviks should be given their due: for the first time they managed to realize this utopian plan on the territory of the Russian Empire. Socialism has a chance to take its revenge as a just system of social structure (socialist practices are showing up more and more clearly in the social life of the Scandinavian countries, for example) - but this was impracticable at a time when they tried to introduce this social system in a revolutionary, coercive way. We can say that socialism in Russia was ahead of its time. It hardly became such a terrible and inhuman system, especially in comparison with the capitalist one. And it is all the more appropriate to recall that historically it was the Western European "progressive" empires that caused the suffering and death of the largest number of people around the world - Russia is far from in this respect, in particular, to Great Britain (probably, it is she who is the true "empire of evil ", An instrument of genocide for Ireland, the peoples of the American continent, India, China and many others). Returning to the socialist experiment in the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century, it should be admitted: the peoples living in it, it cost innumerable sacrifices and suffering throughout the century. German Chancellor Bismarck is credited with the following words: "If you want to build socialism, take a country that you do not feel sorry for." Unfortunately, Russia was not a pity. Nevertheless, no one has the right to blame Russia for its path, especially given the foreign policy practice of the past 20th century as a whole.

The only problem is that under Soviet-style socialism and the general level of the productive forces of the 20th century, the economy does not want to work. From the word at all. A person deprived of material interest in the results of his labor works poorly. Moreover, at all levels, from an ordinary worker to a high official. The Soviet Union - having Ukraine, Kuban, Don and Kazakhstan - was forced to buy grain abroad in the mid-1960s. Even then, the situation with food supply in the USSR was catastrophic. Then the socialist state was saved by a miracle - the discovery of "big" oil in Western Siberia and the rise in world prices for this raw material. Some economists believe that without this oil, the collapse of the USSR would have happened already in the late 70s.

Speaking about the reasons for the defeat of the Soviet Union in the Cold War, of course, one should not forget about ideology. The USSR was originally created as a state with a completely new ideology, and for many years it was his most powerful weapon. In the 50s and 60s, many states (especially in Asia and Africa) voluntarily chose the socialist type of development. Believed in the building of communism and Soviet citizens. However, already in the 70s it became clear that the building of communism was a utopia, which at that time could not be realized. Moreover, even many representatives of the Soviet nomenklatura elite, the main future beneficiaries of the collapse of the USSR, stopped believing in such ideas.

But at the same time, it should be noted that today many Western intellectuals admit: it was precisely the confrontation with the "backward" Soviet system that forced the capitalist systems to mimic, to accept unfavorable social norms that originally appeared in the USSR (8-hour working day, equal rights of women , all kinds of social benefits and much more). It will not be superfluous to repeat: most likely, the time of socialism has not yet arrived, since there is no civilizational base for this and the corresponding level of development of production in the global economy. Liberal capitalism is by no means a panacea for world crises and suicidal global wars, but rather the opposite, an inevitable path to them.

The defeat of the USSR in the Cold War was due not so much to the power of its opponents (although it was certainly great), as to the insoluble contradictions inherent in the Soviet system itself. But in the modern world order, internal contradictions have not diminished, and certainly not increased security and peace.

Results of the Cold War

Of course, the main positive outcome of the Cold War is that it did not develop into a hot war. Despite all the contradictions between the states, the parties were smart enough to realize which edge they were on and not to cross the fatal line.

However, other consequences of the Cold War can hardly be overestimated. In fact, today we live in a world that was largely shaped during that historical period. It was during the Cold War that the current system of international relations emerged. And at the very least, it works. In addition, one should not forget that a significant part of the world elite was formed during the years of confrontation between the United States and the USSR. You could say they hail from the Cold War.

The Cold War influenced practically all international processes that took place during this period. New states arose, wars began, uprisings and revolutions broke out. Many countries in Asia and Africa gained independence or got rid of the colonial yoke thanks to the support of one of the superpowers, which thus sought to expand their own zone of influence. Even today there are countries that can be safely called "relics of the Cold War" - for example, Cuba or North Korea.

It should be noted that the Cold War contributed to the development of technology. The confrontation between the superpowers gave a powerful impetus to the study of outer space, without it it is not known whether the landing on the moon would have taken place or not. The arms race contributed to the development of missile and information technology, mathematics, physics, medicine, and more.

If we talk about the political results of this historical period, then the main one, without a doubt, is the collapse of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the entire socialist camp. As a result of these processes, about two dozen new states have appeared on the political map of the world. Russia inherited from the USSR the entire nuclear arsenal, most of the conventional weapons, as well as a place in the UN Security Council. And as a result of the Cold War, the United States has significantly increased its power and today, in fact, is the only superpower.

The end of the Cold War led to two decades of explosive growth in the global economy. The vast territories of the former USSR, previously closed by the "Iron Curtain", have become part of the global market. Military spending dropped sharply, and the funds freed up were channeled into investments.

However, the main result of the global confrontation between the USSR and the West was clear evidence of the utopianism of the socialist model of the state in the context of social development at the end of the 20th century. Today in Russia (and other former Soviet republics), controversy over the Soviet era in the country's history is raging. Someone sees good in it, others call it the greatest catastrophe. At least one more generation must be born so that the events of the Cold War (as well as the entire Soviet period) are viewed as a historical fact - calmly and without emotion. The communist experiment is, of course, the most important experience for human civilization, which has not yet been "reflected". And it is possible that this experience will still benefit Russia.

If you are tired of advertising on this site, download our mobile application here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.news.android.military or below by clicking on the Google Play logo. There we have reduced the number of ad units specifically for our regular audience.
Also in the app:
- even more news
- update 24 hours a day
- notifications about major events

If you have any questions - leave them in the comments below the article. We or our visitors will be happy to answer them.

§ 23. THE BIRTH OF A SUPERPOWER AND THE "COLD WAR"

New industrial breakthrough. After the end of World War II, the further development of the USSR depended on the strategic course of the government, which had to take into account the most important changes that had taken place in the world.

On February 9, 1946, JV Stalin made a keynote speech in connection with the elections to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, in which the advantages of the Soviet social system were emphasized. He set the task for three new five-year plans to triple the volume of industrial production in comparison with the pre-war level in order to secure the country "from all accidents." The main burden of state spending again fell on the population, but the leader assured that these sacrifices for the sake of restoring and raising the national economy were the last.

The war changed Soviet society, and the government had to reckon with it. The hard times experienced by the war, the "march to Europe" of Soviet troops and the acquaintance of millions of soldiers and officers with life abroad aroused people's hopes for a better life, and not for new tests of strength. Society realized the need for changes, rethinking the values ​​of the social system, which Soviet propaganda spoke so loftily about.

The transformation of the USSR into a superpower required a new industrial breakthrough. The methods of its implementation remained the same as in the 1930s: lack of state support for the population, tax oppression, worsening living conditions.

The transition of the Soviet Union to peaceful construction was accompanied by many difficulties. The loss of life and property was enormous. In the course of hostilities during the Great Patriotic War in the USSR, 1710 cities and towns were completely or partially destroyed, more than 70 thousand villages and villages, about 6 million buildings, 25 million people lost their homes. Repeated mobilization of the population to the front led to the predominance of low-skilled novices, adolescents, women, old people among the labor force, which led to a decrease in the pre-war level of labor productivity. The situation was aggravated by the devastation in transport, agriculture, and the depletion of raw materials.

Cards for food and manufactured goods were canceled only in December 1947, at the same time a monetary reform was carried out. The government has managed to stabilize the financial system. From March 1950, the currency value of the ruble began to be expressed not in US dollars (as it had been since 1937), but was transferred to a gold basis, which allowed the USSR to achieve the independence of the ruble from foreign currencies and to pursue an independent economic course.

The fourth five-year plan provided for the restoration of industrial production in the USSR by 1948, and by the end of the five-year plan it was planned to exceed the pre-war level by 1.5 times. In practice, the restoration of a number of industries was fully completed only by 1953.

In the course of the five-year plan, an extensive program of increasing energy resources was carried out: the Farkhad hydroelectric power station in the Syrdarya, the Shchekinskaya hydroelectric power station in the Moscow region, etc. were built, new oil reservoirs of the Caspian Sea were used. In 1948, the large Romashkinskoye oil field was discovered in Tatarstan.

The potential of the domestic industry has grown significantly due to the captured property, however, there were difficulties with the installation of foreign equipment and technically competent operation.

During the years of the fourth five-year plan, the number of workers increased by 8 million and amounted to 40.4 million in 1950.

The priorities in the development of the post-war economy still belonged to heavy industry, the strengthening and growth of military power, which was largely due to the beginning of the Cold War. In 1950, the gross output of the USSR (in prices of 1926 - 1927) amounted to 240 billion rubles, including group "A" - 162, group "B" - 78 billion rubles. Military expenditures grew continuously; huge sums of money were absorbed by the so-called "uranium project" - the development and testing of a nuclear bomb - during the implementation of which new industries were created: the nuclear industry and nuclear engineering.

“The level of the pre-war 1940 in terms of the total annual volume of industrial production,” said G.M. Malenkov at the XIX Party Congress in 1952, “was achieved and surpassed in 1948, in terms of coal production - in 1947, according to in the production of steel and cement in 1948, in the production of iron and oil production in 1949, in the production of footwear in 1950, in the production of cotton fabrics in 1951. This means that the war delayed the development of industry by 8 - 9 years, that is, approximately for two five-year plans. However, industrial successes were achieved at the expense of maintaining a low standard of living for the majority of the population.

The restoration of agricultural production proceeded much more slowly than industrial production: not only the consequences of the war, but also an insignificant amount of state investment in the countryside affected. According to official data, in 1950 the gross agricultural output was 97% of the 1940 level, however, in terms of the main types of products, primarily grain, the lag from the pre-war years was significant.

Material living conditions of the population after the war. They were extremely difficult: the situation was somewhat better in large cities than in medium and small ones, in villages the situation was worse than in cities.

The standard of living of Soviet people is evidenced, for example, by budget surveys of the families of workers in Moscow. Most of the food "basket" of the working family was occupied by potatoes and bread. If in 1950 the consumption of bread fell slightly in comparison with the pre-war level, then the consumption of low-calorie, but cheap potatoes increased by a third. By the early 1950s. consumption of meat, milk, eggs, fish and vegetables slightly increased in comparison with 1940, but the actual level of their consumption was far from necessary.

In 1948, the USSR Ministry of Finance carried out an analysis of the subsistence level in Washington and Moscow for 1 person per month (based on the ratio of 1 US dollar = 7 rubles 70 kopecks). This minimum was $ 251 for an American and, accordingly, RUB 932. for a Muscovite. However, even the average monthly wage of a skilled worker in the highest paid industries in the USSR (coal, non-ferrous and ferrous metallurgy) did not exceed 1200-1400 rubles in those years.

Factory workers at the May Day demonstration. 1951 g.

The wages of rural workers were lower than in the cities: in 1950, up to half of all collective farms in the country issued no more than 1 kg of grain per workday; about a quarter did not pay money at all for workdays, and 30% of collective farms did not pay more than 40 kopecks. In these conditions, the role of personal subsidiary plots has increased. It was these 20-30 acres of household land on which the villagers worked after a hard day on the collective farm land that helped millions of people not to starve to death.

Of course, the huge losses in the war affected the post-war demographic development of the USSR. But the state policy had no less influence on the population size. Thus, the annual natural increase in the rural population before the war significantly exceeded the corresponding indicator in the cities. The same trend, albeit on a smaller scale, continued in the post-war years. At the same time, the urban population of the USSR increased in 1946-1953. from 58 to 80.2 million people, and rural - decreased from 112.5 to 107.8 million. The main reason for the growth of the urban population was that the overwhelming majority of the younger generation, due to the harsh living conditions, left the villages for the cities. The population of the USSR changed as follows (million people at the beginning of the year): 1940 - 194.1; 1946 - 170.6; 1950 - 178.5 and 1953 - 188.0.

Great damage to the country was caused by famine caused by the severe drought of 1946. Beginning in early spring in Moldova, the drought quickly spread to the southwestern regions of Ukraine, then covered all areas of the Central Black Earth zone, including the northern part of Ukraine. From about mid-May, drought hit the right-bank areas of the Lower Volga region.

In the “battle for the harvest,” government interests prevailed over the needs of the population. In October 1946, 59.5 million people were on rations, including only 4 million in rural areas (mainly state farm workers, agronomists, doctors, teachers). Meanwhile, more than 100 million people lived in the countryside.

Demining the grave of A.S. Pushkin in Mikhailovsky

The lack of guaranteed earnings on the collective farms, the huge taxes on the private farmsteads of the villagers, which were imposed on the crop failure, led to mass starvation and the flight of people from the village. The Soviet government had the necessary grain reserves to feed the starving population of the country, but in 1947-1950. it preferred to sharply increase the export of grain abroad. As a result, in 1947 alone, direct losses from hunger amounted to 770.7 thousand people.

USSR and the beginning of the formation of the socialist system. World War II changed the world: two superpowers were formed that fought for leadership - the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Both countries tried to use the fruits of their victories over Germany and Japan to increase their international prestige. In Eastern Europe, the communists came to power, the formation of the world socialist system began.

The USSR imposed its experience of socialist construction on the countries of people's democracies, which, as the subsequent decades showed, gave rise to conflicts and tensions in the international situation. In September 1947, on the initiative of the USSR, the communist and workers' parties of nine countries (Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, USSR, France, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia) established an Information Bureau - Cominform. This organization became an instrument of Moscow's control over the Communist Parties of countries that were part of the sphere of Soviet influence. The unceremonious imposition of the Soviet order caused an acute Soviet-Yugoslav conflict, which ended in a break in diplomatic relations in 1949.

In January 1949, six countries (Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia) created the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), whose tasks included the exchange of economic experience and the provision of technical assistance. In its foreign economic policy, the Soviet Union often ignored the interests of its partners, which was detrimental to their economy. At the same time, the large-scale raw material aid from the USSR largely compensated the socialist countries for the economic dictate of the Soviet Union, since at that time Europe suffered from a shortage of raw materials and fuel.

After the victory of the revolution in China and the formation of the PRC, relations between this country and the Soviet Union became friendly. In 1950, both states signed a treaty of friendship, alliance and mutual assistance.

The beginning of the confrontation between the two systems. Scientists define the Cold War as a political, ideological, economic and local military confrontation of two antagonistic systems - capitalist and socialist, where the USA and the USSR played the role of the first violin from opposite sides. Among the main reasons for the Cold War are: the negative reaction of Western countries, primarily the United States, to the growing influence of the USSR in the world, associated with the decisive contribution of the Soviet Union to the defeat of fascism, the ideological confrontation between the two social systems, increasing mutual distrust, the claims of both powers to leading role in solving world problems.

The initiative in unleashing the Cold War belonged to the West: the new US military doctrine proceeded from the premise that, since a clash between the two powers is inevitable, it should, without waiting for the USSR to restore its economy and military power, crush it with a sudden blow. At the end of 1945, even when both countries had allied obligations, a top-secret document was prepared in the American administration: a map was drawn up of 15 cities (Moscow, Baku, Novosibirsk, Gorky, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk, etc.), which were subject to an atomic strike. In December, a newly developed plan called for an increase in the number of cities to be bombed with atomic bombs.

One of the ideological inspirers of the "containment of communism" was the former British Prime Minister W. Churchill. He gave a keynote speech in March 1946 in the American city of Fulton in the presence of President H. Truman. W. Churchill formulated the goals of a "fraternal association of English-speaking peoples" directed against the growing danger to Christian civilization from "communist or neo-fascist states." For this, he believed, the United States and its Western allies should maintain a monopoly on the possession of the atomic bomb, unite their naval forces, aviation and military bases under a single leadership.

Churchill saw the main threat to the world community in the growing influence of the communist parties in European countries, acting "in complete unity and absolute obedience to the instructions received from the communist center." The speech was previously agreed with the White House.

In 1947, the American president put forward the so-called Truman Doctrine, which read: "World peace requires American leadership in the fight against total aggression, direct or indirect, in any area of ​​the globe." Total aggression meant the actions of the USSR. In 1949, the United States and its Western allies created the NATO military bloc.

In 1949, in accordance with the Dropshot military plan, the Americans planned to drop 300 atomic bombs on 100 cities of the Soviet Union. As declassified documents testify, the American doctrine of the second half of the 1940s. was based on the following provisions: a war with the USSR is a reality, if it is not possible to "reject" world socialism; The USSR and its allies must not reach the level of the United States militarily and economically; The United States must be ready to be the first to use nuclear weapons.

American plane shot down in the skies of Korea

America pursued far-reaching political goals, dropping atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945. With this barbaric action, the United States wanted to demonstrate to all countries (and primarily the USSR) its claims to absolute hegemony in the world. In the Soviet Union, separate work on the creation of atomic weapons (mainly by theoretical physicists) was carried out even before the war. Since 1943, the development of such weapons has become the most important state task. Successful tests of the Soviet atomic bomb were carried out on August 29, 1949 at the test site near Semipalatinsk.

The culminating point of the confrontation between the two superpowers at the initial stage of the Cold War was the participation of the United States and the USSR in the Korean War (June 25, 1950 - July 28, 1953). North Korea (DPRK) began military operations. North Korean leader Kim Il Sung made the decision to attack South Korea after he secured support from Stalin and Mao Zedong. At first, the Soviet government provided the DPRK with assistance with weapons, military equipment, and material resources, and at the end of November 1950 transferred several air divisions to China, which participated in repelling the US air raids on the territory of North Korea and China. The famous pilot Ivan Kozhedub fought in the skies of Korea.

The war went on with varying degrees of success. After the death of JV Stalin, the Soviet leadership, together with China and the DPRK, reached an agreement with the Americans on an armistice in Korea. After difficult negotiations, the parties signed a peace agreement (July 1953).

American historians believe that the North Korean aggression prompted the NATO countries to strengthen the alliance, build up their armed forces, agree to the presence of American troops in Europe, and even take measures to remilitarize the FRG.

However, not a single local military conflict of the Cold War period escalated into a large-scale war. The superpowers have learned to find a compromise in acute international conflicts and circumstances.

Questions and tasks

1 ... What, in your opinion, was the main priority of JV Stalin's post-war policy - internal problems or international ones? Give reasons for your answer. 2. Using the material of the paragraph and Internet resources, draw up the Cold War table according to the following scheme: a) the opposing sides and their military doctrines; b) the reasons for the confrontation; c) the main military conflicts in 1946 - 1953; d) external factors influencing the international policy of the USSR in the post-war period. 3. Using knowledge from the course of general history, draw up a comparative table "The economic situation of the USSR, European countries and the United States in the first post-war years."

Creative activity

Using the Internet resources, prepare a presentation on one of the largest industrial achievements of the Fourth Five-Year Plan.

Research activities

In June 1946, 24 million workers and employees received their wages in full. They were distributed as follows (the actual salary was taken into account, and not the rate or salary): up to 100 rubles - 5.6%, 101 - 150 - 9.2%, 151 - 200 - 10.7%, 201 - 250 - 8.8 %, 251 - 300 - 8.7%, 301 - 400 - 15.4%, 401 - 500 - 11.6%, 501 - 600 - 8.0%.

Using the material in the paragraph, document and Internet resources, analyze the standard of living in the city and village.

From the reports of the secret department of TASS (radio intercepts) addressed to I. V. Stalin and V. M. Molotov. October 11, 1945

The London correspondent of the Chicago Tribune newspaper, referring to reports from diplomatic circles, reports that a fierce backstage power struggle is taking place in Moscow between Marshal Zhukov and Foreign Minister Molotov, who are trying to take Stalin's dictatorial place.

Radio Moscow announced today that Stalin had left the Kremlin for a "short rest," but it was not specified where he had gone. This is Stalin's first vacation since the beginning of the war with Germany and the first vacation he ever took. The diplomatic representatives who attended the Potsdam conference report that Stalin is very ill and it should be recalled that the convening of the conference was delayed due to his ill health. This summer, there were reports in Paris that Stalin might leave his post due to heart disease. Zhukov's ambition to become a dictator is reportedly backed by the army, while Molotov is backed by the Communist Party, Stalin's 66-year-old is reported to be a factor in the current maneuvers of his successors.

US Ambassador to the Soviet Union Harriman told the press that Generalissimo Stalin was in good health and that rumors of his illness had no basis.

Harriman visited Stalin in Sochi, the Black Sea resort, where Stalin is spending his holidays.

Using the material in the paragraph, the document and Internet resources, tell us about the balance of power in the Stalinist Politburo in the post-war years.

From the book History. Russian history. Grade 11. A basic level of the author Kiselev Alexander Fedotovich

§ 23. BIRTH OF SUPERPOWER AND "COLD WAR" New industrial breakthrough. After the end of World War II, the further development of the USSR depended on the strategic course of the government, which had to take into account the most important changes that took place in the world. February 9, 1946.

From the book Rockets and People. Hot days of the cold war the author Chertok Boris Evseevich

1.1 "COLD WAR" During the Second World War, two fundamentally new types of strategic weapons were created. Germany has long-range ballistic guided missiles, and the USA has an atomic bomb.

From the book of the USSR under siege the author Utkin Anatoly Ivanovich

Cold War In the 1950s, Navyman Redford was a fan of aviation, which he considered the main striking force in future conflicts. After becoming the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Eisenhower, the admiral introduced Washington's strategic vision From the book The Crown of the Horde Empire, or there was no Tatar yoke the author Enikeev Gali Rashitovich

Part II The Birth of a Superpower

From the book From Empires to Imperialism [The State and the Emergence of Bourgeois Civilization] the author Kagarlitsky Boris Yulievich

"COLD WAR" After World War II, the League of Nations was replaced by the United Nations, where a privileged position was granted to the "leading world powers" that won the war - the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, China and the restored

From the book Secrets of the Stasi. The history of the famous secret service of the GDR author Keller John

The Cold War The militancy of the USSR took on new dimensions after the United States developed the Marshall Plan to provide assistance to war-torn Europe, including the Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe. Stalin rejected this plan,

by Baggott Jim

From the book The Secret History of the Atomic Bomb by Baggott Jim

Cold War The USSR was satisfied with the outcome of the December meeting, but America was not. Truman was annoyed that Byrnes could not promptly inform him of the negotiations. In addition, the President did not approve of some of the foreign policy decisions made by Byrnes. To

From the book Khrushchev: intrigue, betrayal, power the author Dorofeev Georgy Vasilievich

Cold War Underestimation and misunderstanding by members of the Politburo of Stalin's latest theoretical work "The Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR" had serious and far-reaching consequences. The leader was finally convinced that among his comrades-in-arms he would not find a worthy

From the book Russian Berlin the author Popov Alexander Nikolaevich

V. THE COLD WAR In Europe, Berlin was the hottest spot of the Cold War. Here were the troops of the victorious countries: the USA, England, France - in the Western zone and the USSR - in the Eastern sector. West Berlin during the Cold War was actually a special enclave of the Federal Republic of Germany in

From the book History the author Plavinsky Nikolay Alexandrovich

From the book Louis XIV by Blues François

Cold War Spain, however, was not inclined to come to terms with the losses suffered by it due to the conclusion of the Treaty of Nimwegen. At the beginning of 1680, our ambassador to Madrid, the Marquis de Villars, wrote: “The Catholic king expresses hatred towards the French, which

From the book The Legend of Babylon the author Ilyinsky Peter

From the book Bloody Age the author Popovich Miroslav Vladimirovich

The Cold War, which lasted from 1946 to 1989, was not an ordinary military confrontation. It was a struggle between ideologies and different social systems. The term "cold war" itself appeared among journalists, but quickly became popular.

Causes

It seems that the end of the terrible and bloody Second World War should have led to world peace, friendship and unity of all peoples. But the contradictions among allies and victors only intensified.

The struggle for spheres of influence began. Both the USSR and the countries of the West (led by the United States) sought to expand "their territories."

• Westerners were terrified of the communist ideology. They could not even imagine that private property would suddenly become state property.
• The United States and the USSR did their best to increase their influence, supporting various regimes (which sometimes led to local wars around the world).

A direct collision never happened. Everyone was afraid to press the "red button" and launch nuclear warheads.

Main events

Speech at Fulton as the first "swallow" of the war

In March 1946, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill blamed the Soviet Union. Churchill said that he was engaged in active world expansion, violating rights and freedoms. At the same time, the British Prime Minister called on Western countries to rebuff the USSR. It is from this moment that historians count the beginning of the Cold War.

Truman Doctrine and containment attempts

The United States decided to begin "containment" of the Soviet Union following the events in Greece and Turkey. The USSR demanded territory from the Turkish authorities for the subsequent deployment of a military base in the Mediterranean. This immediately alerted the West. The doctrine of American President Truman marked the complete cessation of cooperation between the former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition.

Creation of military blocs and division of Germany

In 1949, a military alliance of a number of Western countries, NATO, was created. Six years later (in 1955), the Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe united into the Warsaw Pact Organization.

Also in 1949, on the site of the western zone of occupation of Germany, the Federal Republic of Germany appeared, and in the place of the eastern one - the German Democratic Republic.

Chinese Civil War

The civil war in China in 1946-1949 was also a consequence of the ideological struggle of two systems. After the end of World War II, China was also divided into 2 parts. The northeast was ruled by the People's Liberation Army of China. The rest were subordinate to Chiang Kai-shek (leader of the Kuomintang party). When peaceful elections failed, war broke out. The winner was the Chinese Communist Party.

Korean war

Korea also at this time was split into 2 zones of occupation under the control of the USSR and the United States. Their protégés are Kim Il Sung in the north and Lee Seungman in the south of Korea. Each of them wanted to take over the whole country. War broke out (1950-1953), which, apart from huge human casualties, did not lead to anything. The borders of North and South Korea have remained virtually unchanged.

Berlin Crisis

The most difficult years of the Cold War are the early 60s. It was then that the whole world was on the brink of a nuclear war. In 1961, USSR Secretary General Khrushchev demanded that American President Kennedy radically change the status of West Berlin. The Soviet Union was alarmed by the activity of Western intelligence services there, as well as the "brain drain" to the West. There was no military clash, but West Berlin was surrounded by a wall - the main symbol of the Cold War. Many German families found themselves on opposite sides of the barricades.

Cuban crisis

The most intense conflict of the Cold War was the crisis in Cuba in 1962. The USSR, in response to a request from the leaders of the Cuban revolution, agreed to the deployment of medium-range nuclear missiles on Freedom Island.

As a result, any town in the United States could be wiped out in 2-3 seconds. The United States did not like this "neighborhood". It almost came to the "red nuclear button". But here, too, the parties managed to agree peacefully. The Soviet Union did not deploy missiles, and the United States guaranteed Cuba non-interference in their affairs. Also, American missiles were withdrawn from Turkey.

Détente policy

The Cold War did not always proceed in an acute phase. At times, tension was replaced by "relaxation". During such periods, the United States and the USSR concluded the most important agreements on the limitation of strategic nuclear weapons and missile defense. In 1975 the Helsinki meeting of 2 countries was held, the Soyuz-Apollo program was launched in space.

A new round of tension

The entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan in 1979 led to a new round of tension. The United States waged a complex of economic sanctions against the Soviet Union in 1980-1982. The installation of the next American missiles began in European countries. Under Andropov, all negotiations with the United States ended.

The crisis of the socialist countries. Restructuring

By the mid-1980s, many socialist countries were on the verge of a crisis. Help from the USSR was getting less and less. The needs of the population grew, people tried to go to the West, where they discovered a lot of new things for themselves. People's consciousness was changing. They wanted change, life in a more open and free society. The technical lag of the USSR from the countries of the West was increasing.

• Realizing this, the USSR General Secretary Gorbachev tried to revive the economy by means of "perestroika", give the people more "publicity" and switch to "new thinking."
• The communist parties of the socialist camp tried to modernize their ideology and switch to a new economic policy.
• The Berlin Wall, which was the symbol of the Cold War, has fallen. The unification of Germany took place.
• The USSR began to withdraw its troops from European countries.
• In 1991, the Warsaw Pact Organization was dissolved.
• The USSR, which did not survive a deep economic crisis, also disintegrated.

Outcomes

Historians debate whether it is worth linking the end of the Cold War with the collapse of the USSR. Yet the end of this confrontation took place back in 1989, when many authoritarian regimes in Eastern Europe ceased to exist. The contradictions on the ideological front were completely removed. Many countries of the former socialist bloc became part of the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance