Lack of agreement and failure

Consequences

1) Despite promises made at Yalta Soviets showed that they were not prepared to give up influence in Central and Eastern Europe – this can be seen in lat February 1945 with the Soviet forcing the Romanians to accept a Soviet Democratic government which was dominated by Soviet infuence.

2) This irritated the Western allies but at the same time British remembered their deal in October 1944 by which they traded influence in Romania for influence in Greece. As a result there was no outcry over Soviet actions in Romania.

3) Two other crucial issues post-Yalta

a) FDR dies – Replaced by President Truman (vice-president), not as diplomatically able as FDR, still interested in Wilsonism, but turns to a more confrontative attitude to the Soviets

b) Some success regarding Poland – four non-communist Poles enter the Polish cabinet as a result of above – these included the prime minister of the government in exile, Stanislaw Mikolajczyk

c) Poland was however still a crucial issue as the Potsdam conference occurred in August 1945

The third major conference of the Big Three after Tehran and Yalta – was held in Potsdam in August 1945. At Potsdam further disagreements arose between the allies, Some agreements UK/US, Soviets US but the British and Soviets start to disagree frequently. Britain and the US began to be more and more worried about Soviet tactics in Eastern Europe and repressions carried out there. In addition the Soviets were irritated by the tactics of the British and Americans in their prevention of Soviet influence there. We can see the slow development of two blocs here.

-The most clear disagreement between British and Soviets was over the Mediterranean and the Black sea. British were annoyed at Soviet moves in the region, including an attempt to maintain a mandate in the former Italian colony of Libya and also demands regarding the Black sea straights near Turkey (the Dardanelles). British consider spheres of influence again, Brits Mediterranean, Soviets in Central Europe.

In addition to rising disagreements other issues dealt with at Potsdam. Soviets were entitled to 10% of industrial capital equipment from the Western occupied zones of Germany.

Potsdam also dealt provisionally with Poland’s Western border (show pictures – CGL). This meant that Germany would have problems resurrecting itself economically as these lands were lost for German agriculture. Agreement to transfer German populations in these lands back to the German rump state – 9 million Germans lived in the lands before the war – immense task (maybe a picture of displaced Germans? CGL)

Disagreements await a later date.

The next important event was the meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Big Three in September 1945, France joined the meeting.

By this time a number of other things had added to the atmosphere of tension between the great powers: General idea – British worried about their spheres of influence so feel better to go with the US

1)Atom Bomb – disagreement over why the US dropped the atom bomb in Japan but some say that it was more for political than military reasons as the Japanese were almost defeated by August 1945 anyway – so was decision taken to scare the Soviet Union – show it was a great power? Or Was it to prevent Soviet invasion of Japan (Soviets had declared war on Japan in August 1945) protection of sphere of influence. Soviets distrust the US as a result of the dropping of the bomb and also annoyed they could not have influence in Japan (need for some form of treaty regarding nuclear power usage).

- Soviet requests – again irritated the British who wanted to maintain their sphere of influence in the mediterranean.

- US dominate the Japanese occupation arrangements after the dropping of the bomb – Soviets feel left out.

- Soviets also prevented from gaining power in the regions of Turkey (Kars, Ardahan) and Italy (development of spheres of influence).

Lack of agreement and failure

Mainly as the main powers start to focus on their own interests instead of co-operation – cracks starting to appear in the veneer of co-operation – how can we best maintain our power?

Brits focus on Mediterranean, US Asia, Latin America, Soviets East Europe

Build of great power interests hurts co-operation – how did this position develop into a rift?

1) Americans at this point were still more willing to listen to the Soviets then were the British, who were worried about their interests in the Mediterranean – meeting discussed the governments of Bulgaria and Romania and nuclear weapons. Failure to come to any agreement on any of the issues – drift towards spheres of influences – division between the powers were exacerbated by the difference in ideologies (free market ideology of Britain, US and Socialist/Communist ideology of the Soviet Union. Last attempt at compromise between the big three.

2) Several further events important during this period of time. One example Stalin’s speech regarding the….

3) In a similar vein – Churchill – showing the increasing divide amongst the different power blocs -

4) Soviets show their strenghth through their attitude towards Turkey in early 1946 – territory sought there (opposition to the British) – troop build up on the Soviet Turkish border – an American warship sent there to make sure nothing happens, gradual development of mistrust

5) Build up in tension evidenced by the turn of US public opinion against the Soviets – by February 1946 – only 35% of US public trusts Soviets to cooperate

6) Important policy turn in US foreign policy – launched by the young US diplomat George Keenan – Keenan stated the Soviet Union would inevitably have an anti-Western policy for several reasons. Firstly due to ideology – the Soviet ideology was inevitably opposed to that of the West and this would carry over into foreign policy. Secondly he argued that the Soviets were carrying on the Tsarists policy of territorial expansion. These things were diametrically opposed to the West. Keenan argued that the US had to oppose these developments by containment, this was through strengthening the things the US had and by counteracting the Soviets around the world. This was a key policy which would lead to the Cold War. Both sides through it were considered different and irreconcileable. From mid 1946 onwards this became the key US foreign policy, and influenced the US’ position towards Europe and the world for the next 45 years.

7) Classic example of this new confrontation – drives British and US together was the failure of Soviets from withdrwing from Northern Iran in March 1946 after 6 months – supposed to. Iran complained to the UN, British and US put pressure on Soviets to wirthdraw – and they do so. Great Britain and the US drawn together.

There were clear reasons for the growth of confrontation between the main powers. Firstly as we have seen there was a movement away from co-operation to focusing on varous power interests in different parts of the world. So Soviets, USA and the British.

-Even if the US sought to create a world order characterised by principles of peace and security, they were constantly confronted by the interests of the different powers, Soviets attempting to intervene in Japan or in Italy. On the other side the Soviets were annoyed by the interventions of the West in their interests in Eastern Europe. Became more difficult to reconcile.

- Different powers didn’t want to accept the interests of others – less and less need to do so, no need to oppose the Germans anymore.

As I was saying before Britain divided between a foreign policy of principles and one of spheres of influence. Britain wanted to intervene in issues across Europe – couldn’t do this if it denied political principles.

Worried about losses in their sphere of influence – in their empire.

-Major worries of the Russians – that there would be governments opposed to them in Eastern Europe, Poland in the inter-war period – Soviets could not accept this. Therefore they moved to control the situation in the region.

- Competition between the three powers meant that if one of them let go of their position in a certain region, due to a lack of trust there was less chance that the other powers would accept the other powers in their areas of expertise. What was the point of the Soviets giving up their position if the British and the Americans wouldn’t?

-Importance of US public opinion, had been convinced of a war on freedom, they couldn’t accept the idea of spheres of influence – that different powers could do what they want in their areas. This meant the States were drawn to criticising the Soviet position in Central and Eastern Europe (not allowing governments to be formed freely in Eastern Europe). This brought them into conflict with the Soviets.

- Americans worry about the impact of being excluded from other spheres of influence – need to expand after the expansion of the Second World War – America needed these markets – wasn’t prepared for them to be lost – again conflict with USSR in Eastern Europe.

- Worry that the left in Europe was challenging. Civil war in Greece 1946-7, Soviets support the Greek communist efforts in the region at this time. Also mass marches of Italian and French Communists in 1946-7, again supported by the Soviet Union. Growing worry from the US that this will lead to a Communist Europe.

- Need by the US to maintain a liberal economic order, so the growth of the left the US worried would threaten this.

Keenan’s doctrine about containment of the United States begins to be taken on by the US diplomatic establishment. Truman realises confrontation with the Soviet Union is popular amongst the US public and also plays to the demands of the Republicans who dominate the US congress and Senate. So further pushing of anti-Soviet attitude and maintenance of what they had in Western Europe.

Focus on the merging of the Western Zones in Germany – Americans wanted Germany to recover economically, stop the spread of Communism and allow the development of the European economy. This becomes a crucial aim. More confrontational actions in Germany. Firstly May 1946 end of reparations payments to the Soviet Union.

January 1947 unification of the US and British zones, March 1947 onwards West Germany seen as a bulwark to communism + development of European economy. (we’ll move back to situation in Germany later)

- Crucial movement in the development of East and West clash, Truman doctrine in March 1947 – combination of the US containment policy, the desire to economically reconstruct Europe and the desire to maintain free market policies in Europe. Harvest failure and harsh winter in 1947. Worries that Greece and Turkey would fall to the Communists. Truman plays the senate’s anticommunism to get help. Shorterm success regarding loans. Longterm process changes US politics for good (Cold War)

Marshall Plan underlines the ideas of the Truman doctrine, link between the principles of FDR (support national self-determination and democracy)and the need to support the economic recovery of Europe. Propose aid to reconstruct Europe. Everyone invited including Eastern European countries, but at the meeting in Paris to discuss the plan, Soviet representants offended by the need to reconstruct economies in the East to accept the plan, walk out. US happy about this. 1948 – 4 million dollar aid package awarded (Western Europe takes it up) Serious division in Europe – backing of Western Europe to save the world economy.

US also support the economic resurrection of Japan as well – initial policy by Americans in Japan focused on removing nationalists and patriots in the country. Anti-business attitude. From 1947 realise need to save Japan just like Europe, reversion of policy, support of business over Labour – American supplies loans for it to develop. (important ally in the far East – Communism to China).

In the East movement by the Soviets to strengthen their position in the East. Debate over whether Stalin wanted to completely wanted to control the region from the beginning of the post-war era. In 1945 Soviets still interested in co-operation with the West, 1946 delaying policy, Stalin doesn’t want to oppose the West directly, show the West he was still keeping to the agreements of Yalta (or at least superficially). Move towards a more strict policy in the region, rigged elections in Romania, Poland and Hungary in 1947. Although until Spring 1947 opposition groups still existed in parts of Eastern Europe. By the end of 1947 they had almost totally disappeared, showtrials across the East – even diehard communists such as Gomulka were tried, either imprisoned or executed. Until 1947 Stalin leaves Czechs to theirselves, but begins to worry that the Czechs will move towards the West. Finally in February 1948 Stalin provokes a coup in Czech republic. End of political freedom in Eastern Europe. Puppet governments imposed across the region. By mid-1948 political takeover finished in Eastern Europe.

Move towards ideological confrontation from 1946 onwards – especially since the middle of 1946. Speeches directly anti-Communist and anti-capitalist.

Movement from criticising each other to outright propaganda by 1948 – this can be seen from the creation of Cominform in Szklarska Poreba in September 1947 – This officially ends the Soviet acceptance of co-operation with non-fascist parties. Two blocs had been formed – Zhdanov.

- Containment – both blocs accept that they will focus on their part of Europe, the world. US will not threaten Soviet Union, will only solidify what they had – i.e Western Europe.

- Ideological confrontation – secure communism and capitalism – deepens their blocs, but clearly opposed to each other, suspicion at the start of the system – continues for the 40 years.

Go through the conclusions. Different spheres of influence, different ideological concerns (moralism of US foreign policy). Others have a much less moral policy.

Ideology becomes crucial in Europe for the first time since the thirty years war.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16