After graduation Second World War, which has become the largest and most violent conflict in the entire human history, a confrontation arose between the countries of the communist camp on the one hand and the Western capitalist countries on the other, between the two superpowers of that time, the USSR and the USA. The Cold War can be briefly described as a rivalry for dominance in the new post-war world.

The main cause of the Cold War was the insoluble ideological contradictions between the two models of society, socialist and capitalist. The West feared the strengthening of the USSR. The absence of a common enemy among the victorious countries, as well as the ambitions of political leaders, played their role.

Historians distinguish the following stages of the Cold War:

March 5, 1946 - 1953 Started the Cold War Churchill's speech, delivered in the spring of 1946 in Fulton, in which the idea of ​​​​creating an alliance of Anglo-Saxon countries to fight communism was proposed. The goal of the United States was an economic victory over the USSR, as well as the achievement of military superiority. In fact, the Cold War began earlier, but it was precisely by the spring of 1946, due to the USSR's refusal to withdraw troops from Iran, that the situation seriously escalated.

1953 - 1962 During this period of the Cold War, the world was on the brink of nuclear conflict. Despite some improvement in relations between the Soviet Union and the United States during the "thaw" Khrushchev, it was at this stage that the anti-communist uprising in Hungary, the events in the GDR and, earlier, in Poland, as well as the Suez crisis took place. International tension increased after the development and successful testing of the USSR in 1957 of an intercontinental ballistic missile. But, the threat of nuclear war receded, as the Soviet Union now had the opportunity to retaliate against US cities. This period of relations between the superpowers ended with the Berlin and Caribbean crises of 1961 and 1962, respectively. It was possible to resolve the Caribbean crisis only during personal negotiations between the heads of state Khrushchev and Kennedy. Also, as a result of the negotiations, whole line agreements on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

1962 - 1979 The period was marked by an arms race that undermined the economies of rival countries. The development and production of new types of weapons required incredible resources. Despite the presence of tension in relations between the USSR and the USA, agreements on the limitation of strategic weapons are signed. A joint space program "Soyuz-Apollo" is being developed. However, by the beginning of the 80s, the USSR began to lose in the arms race.

1979 - 1987 Relations between the USSR and the USA are again aggravated after the introduction of Soviet troops to Afghanistan. In 1983 the United States deployed ballistic missiles at bases in Italy, Denmark, England, the FRG, and Belgium. An anti-space defense system is being developed. The USSR reacts to the actions of the West by withdrawing from the Geneva talks. During this period, the missile attack warning system is in constant combat readiness.

1987 - 1991 The coming to power in the USSR of M. Gorbachev in 1985 led not only to global changes within the country, but also to radical changes in foreign policy called "new political thinking". Ill-conceived reforms finally undermined the economy of the Soviet Union, which led to the country's virtual defeat in the Cold War.

The end of the Cold War was caused by the weakness of the Soviet economy, its inability to support the arms race any longer, as well as the pro-Soviet communist regimes. Anti-war speeches in various parts of the world also played a certain role. The results of the Cold War were depressing for the USSR. The reunification of Germany in 1990 became a symbol of the West's victory.

As a result, after the USSR was defeated in the Cold War, a unipolar model of the world was formed with the US as the dominant superpower. However, there are other consequences of the Cold War. it fast development science and technology, primarily military. So, the Internet was originally created as a communication system for the American army.

Introduction. 2

1. Causes of the Cold War. 3

2. " cold war»: beginning, development. 6

2.1 Beginning of the Cold War.. 6

2.2 Climax of the Cold War.. 8

3. Consequences, results and lessons of the cold war. eleven

3.1 Political, economic and ideological consequences of the cold war.. 11

3.2 Outcomes of the Cold War and whether its outcome was predetermined.. 14

Conclusion. 17

Literature. 19

Introduction

Not only history, but also the attitude towards it, knows sharp turns that mark the qualitative stages of political, social, moral development. human society. With a sufficient degree of reliability, we can say that when civilization steps over power beliefs, everyone will agree that the Cold War - one of the saddest chapters of the 20th century - was the product of human imperfections and ideological prejudices. She might not have been. It would not exist if the actions of people and the actions of states corresponded to their words and declarations.

However, the cold war has descended on mankind. The question arises: why did yesterday's military allies suddenly turn into enemies who are cramped on the same planet? What prompted them to exaggerate the old mistakes and add many new ones to them? This did not fit with common sense, not to mention the allied duty and elementary concepts of decency.

The Cold War did not break out suddenly. She was born in the crucible of the "hot war" and left a very noticeable imprint on the course of the latter. Very many in the United States and England perceived interaction with the USSR in the fight against aggressors as forced, contrary to their attachments and interests, and secretly, and some people clearly dreamed that the battles, which London and Washington had been watching for a long time, would exhaust the forces of Germany as well. and the Soviet Union.

Many did not just dream, but worked out strategies and tactics behind tightly closed doors, counting on gaining a “decisive advantage” in the final direct war, when the time came to take stock, and on the active use of this advantage against the USSR.

G. Hopkins, an adviser to F. Roosevelt, wrote in 1945 that some people across the ocean "really wanted our (American armies), having passed through Germany, to start a war with Russia after the defeat of Germany." And who knows how things would have turned out in reality if the cards had not been confused by the unfinished war with Japan and the need for help from the Red Army, in order, as it was then calculated, to “save up to a million American lives.”

The relevance of the study is that the Cold War was a sharp confrontation between the two systems on the world stage. It became particularly acute in the late 1940s and 1960s. There was a time when the sharpness subsided somewhat, and then intensified again. The Cold War covered all spheres of international relations: political, economic, military and ideological.

Currently due to placement anti-missile system The United States and the negative attitude of representatives of a number of countries, including Russia, to this, since the missiles will be located near Russian borders, this topic is becoming especially acute.

Purpose of the work: to consider the "cold war" in Russia, its causes and origins, development.

1. Causes of the Cold War

The prologue of the "cold war" can be attributed even to the final stage of the Second World War. In our opinion, the decision of the leadership of the United States and Britain not to inform the USSR about the work on the creation of atomic weapons played an important role in its origin. To this we can add Churchill's desire to open a second front not in France, but in the Balkans and move not from West to East, but from south to north, in order to block the path of the Red Army. Then, in 1945, there were plans to push the Soviet troops from the center of Europe to the pre-war borders. And finally, in 1946, a speech in Fulton.

In Soviet historiography, it was generally accepted that the Cold War was unleashed by the United States and its allies, and the USSR was forced to take retaliatory, most often adequate, measures. But at the very end of the 1980s and into the 1990s, other approaches emerged in the coverage of the Cold War. Some authors began to argue that it is generally impossible to determine its chronological framework and establish who started it. Others call both sides, the US and the USSR, responsible for the emergence of the Cold War. Some blame Soviet Union in foreign policy mistakes that led, if not to a direct unleashing, then to the expansion, aggravation and long-term continuation of the confrontation between the two powers.

The very term "cold war" was coined in 1947 by the US Secretary of State. They began to designate the state of political, economic, ideological and other confrontation between states and systems. One Washington government document of that time states that the "cold war" is a "real war" in which the stake is "the survival of the free world."

What were the causes of the Cold War?

The economic reasons for the change in US policy was that the US had grown immeasurably rich during the war years. With the end of the war, they were threatened by an overproduction crisis. At the same time, the economies of European countries were destroyed, their markets were open to American goods, but there was nothing to pay for these goods. The United States was afraid to invest in the economies of these countries, since the influence of leftist forces was strong there and the environment for investment was unstable.

In the United States, a plan was developed, called the Marshall. European countries help was offered to rebuild the shattered economy. Loans were given to buy American goods. The proceeds were not exported, but invested in the construction of enterprises in these countries.

The Marshall Plan was accepted by 16 states of Western Europe. The political condition for the assistance was the removal of communists from governments. In 1947, the communists were withdrawn from the governments of Western European countries. Assistance was also offered to Eastern European countries. Poland and Czechoslovakia began negotiations, but under pressure from the USSR, they refused to help. At the same time, the United States tore up the Soviet-American agreement on loans and passed a law prohibiting exports to the USSR.

The ideological basis of the Cold War was the Truman Doctrine, put forward by the President of the United States in 1947. According to this doctrine, the conflict between Western democracy and communism is irreconcilable. The tasks of the United States are the fight against communism throughout the world, "the containment of communism", "the throwing back of communism into the borders of the USSR." American responsibility was proclaimed for the events taking place all over the world, all these events were viewed through the prism of confrontation between communism and Western democracy, the USSR and the USA.

When talking about the origins of the Cold War, many historians believe it is illogical to try to completely whitewash one side and place all the blame on the other. By now, American and British historians have long accepted partial responsibility for what happened after 1945.

In order to understand the origin and essence of the Cold War, let us turn to the events in the history of the Great Patriotic War.

Since June 1941, the Soviet Union fought Nazi Germany in heavy combat. Roosevelt called the Russian front "the biggest support."

The great battle on the Volga, according to the biographer of Roosevelt and his assistant Robert Sherwood, "changed the whole picture of the war and the prospects for the near future." As a result of one battle, Russia became one of the great world powers. The victory of the Russian troops on Kursk Bulge dispelled all doubts in Washington and London about the outcome of the war. The collapse of Nazi Germany was now only a matter of time.

Accordingly, in the corridors of power in London and Washington, the question arose of whether the anti-Hitler coalition had exhausted itself, was it not time to blow the anti-communist rally?

Thus, already during the course of the war, plans were being considered in some circles in the United States and England, having passed through Germany, to start a war with Russia.

It is widely known that Germany negotiated a separate peace with the Western powers at the end of the war. AT Western literature The Wolf Affair is often described as the first operation of the Cold War. It can be noted that the “Wolf-Dallas affair” was the largest operation against F. Roosevelt and his course, launched during the life of the president and designed to disrupt the implementation of the Yalta agreements.

Truman succeeded Roosevelt. At a meeting at the White House on April 23, 1945, he questioned the usefulness of any agreements with Moscow. “It needs to be broken now or never…” he said. This refers to Soviet-American cooperation. So Truman's actions crossed out the years of Roosevelt's work, when the foundations of mutual understanding with Soviet leaders were laid.

On April 20, 1945, at a meeting with the American president, in an unacceptable form, he demanded that the USSR change its foreign policy in a spirit pleasing to the United States. Less than a month later, without any explanation, deliveries to the USSR under Lend-Lease were stopped. In September, the United States set unacceptable conditions for the Soviet Union to receive the previously promised loan. As Professor J. Geddis wrote in one of his works, the USSR was demanded that “in exchange for an American loan, it should change its system of government and abandon the sphere of influence in Eastern Europe».

Thus, contrary to sober thinking, the concept of permissiveness, based on the monopoly possession of atomic weapons, has taken the leading place in politics and strategy.

2. "Cold War": the beginning, development

2.1 Start of the Cold War

So, at the final stage of the war, the rivalry between the two tendencies in the policy of the United States and Britain sharply escalated.

During the Cold War, the use of force or the threat of force became the rule. The desire to establish its dominance, to dictate on the part of the United States began to manifest itself long ago. After the Second World War, the United States used all means to achieve its goal - from negotiations at conferences, in the United Nations to political, economic and even military pressure in Latin America, in Western Europe, and then in the Near, Middle and Far East. The main ideological cover for their foreign policy doctrine was the struggle against communism. Characteristic in this respect were the slogans: "rejection of communism", "politics on the edge of a knife", "balancing on the brink of war".

From document NSS 68, declassified in 1975 and approved in April 1950 by President Truman, it is clear that the United States then decided to build relations with the USSR only on the basis of constant crisis confrontation. One of the main goals in this direction was to achieve US military superiority over the USSR. The goal of American foreign policy was to "accelerate the decay of the Soviet system."

Already in November 1947, the United States began to put into effect a whole system of restrictive and prohibitive measures in the areas of finance and trade, which marked the beginning of the economic war of the West against the East.

During 1948 there was a progressive advancement of mutual claims in the economic, financial, transport and other spheres. But the Soviet Union took a more accommodating position.

American intelligence reported that the USSR was not preparing for war and was not conducting mobilization measures. At the same time, the Americans understood the loss of their operational and strategic position in the center of Europe.

This is evidenced by an entry in the diary of influential US politician William Leahy on June 30, 1948: “The American military situation in Berlin is hopeless, since there are no sufficient forces anywhere and there is no information that the USSR is experiencing inconvenience due to internal weakness. It would be in the US interests to withdraw from Berlin. However, soon the Soviet side agreed to lift the blockade.

Such is the outline of the events that threatened to lead mankind to a third world war in 1948.

2.2 Climax of the Cold War

The years 1949-1950 were the culmination of the Cold War, marked by the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949, whose "openly aggressive character" was tirelessly exposed by the USSR, the war in Korea and the rearmament of Germany.

1949 was an "extremely dangerous" year, since the USSR no longer doubted that the Americans would remain in Europe for a long time. But it also brought satisfaction to the Soviet leaders: the successful test of the first Soviet atomic bomb in September 1949 and the victory of the Chinese Communists.

The strategic military plans of that time reflected the national interests and capabilities of the country, the realities of that time. Thus, the national defense plan for 1947 set the following tasks for the Armed Forces:

ü To ensure a reliable repulse of aggression and the integrity of the borders in the west and east, established by international treaties after the Second World War.

ü To be ready to repulse an enemy air attack, including with the use of atomic weapons.

ü The Navy must repulse possible aggression from the maritime sectors and provide support for the actions of the ground forces for this purpose.

Soviet foreign policy decisions during the period of the Cold War's emergence were mainly of a reciprocal nature and were determined by the logic of struggle, not the logic of cooperation.

In contrast to its policy pursued in other regions of the world, in the Far East of the USSR, since 1945, it acted with extreme caution. The entry of the Red Army into the war with Japan in August 1945 allowed him to restore in this region the positions lost in 1905 by the tsarist empire. On August 15, 1945, Chiang Kai-shek agreed to the Soviet presence in Port Arthur, Dairen and Manchuria. With Soviet support, Manchuria became an autonomous communist state headed by Gao Gang, who apparently had close ties to Stalin. At the end of 1945, the latter called on the Chinese Communists to find a common language with Chiang Kai-shek. This position has been confirmed several times over the years.

The fact that, starting from the summer of 1947, the political and military situation changed in favor of the Chinese Communists did not generally change the reserved attitude of the Soviet leadership towards the Chinese Communists, who were not invited to the meeting dedicated to the founding of the Comintern.

The enthusiasm of the USSR about the "Chinese brothers in arms" manifested itself only after final victory Mao Zedong. On November 23, 1949, the USSR established diplomatic relations with Beijing. One of the main factors in the agreement was the general hostility towards the US. That this was so was openly confirmed a few weeks later, when the Security Council refused to expel Nationalist China from the UN, the USSR withdrew from all its bodies (until August 1950).

It was thanks to the absence of the USSR that the Security Council was able on June 27, 1950 to adopt a resolution on the introduction of American wax into Korea, where the North Koreans had crossed the 38th parallel two days earlier.

According to some modern versions, Stalin pushed North Korea to this step, who did not believe in the possibility of retaliatory actions by the United States after they “abandoned” Chiang Kai-shek and wanted to compete with Mao in the Far East. Nevertheless, when China, in turn, entered the war on the side of North Korea, the USSR, having come across a firm position from the United States, tried to maintain the local nature of the conflict.

To a greater extent than the conflict in Korea, the "headache" of Soviet foreign policy in the early 1950s was the question of the integration of the FRG into the Western political system and its rearmament. On October 23, 1950, the foreign ministers of the Eastern European camp, who gathered in Prague, proposed signing a peace treaty with Germany, providing for its demilitarization and the withdrawal of all foreign troops from it. In December, the Western countries agreed to a meeting, but demanded that it discuss all the problems on which the confrontation between the West and the East took place.

In September 1951, the US Congress passed the Mutual Security Act, which granted the right to finance emigrant anti-Soviet and counter-revolutionary organizations. On its basis, significant funds were allocated for the recruitment of persons living in the Soviet Union and other countries of Eastern Europe, and payment for their subversive activities.

Speaking of the "cold war" one cannot but touch upon the topic of conflicts that can escalate into a nuclear war. Historical analyzes of the causes and course of crises during the Cold War leave much to be desired.

So far, there are three well-documented cases in which American policy has taken a course for war. In each of them, Washington knowingly risked nuclear war: during the Korean War; in the conflict over the Chinese islands of Kuemoi and Matsu; in the Cuban crisis.

The Caribbean crisis of 1962 convincingly testified that the nuclear missile arsenals of both powers were not only sufficient, but also excessive for mutual destruction, that a further quantitative increase in nuclear potential could not give advantages to either country.

Thus, already in the early 60s, it became obvious that even in the conditions of the Cold War, only compromises, mutual concessions, understanding of each other's interests and the global interests of all mankind, diplomatic negotiations, the exchange of truthful information, the adoption of emergency rescue measures against the emergence of the immediate threat of nuclear war are in our time effective means of conflict resolution. This is the main lesson of the Caribbean crisis.

Being a product of the psychology of the Cold War, it clearly showed the vital need to discard the categories of the old thinking and adopt a new way of thinking, adequate to the threats of the nuclear missile age, global interdependence, the interests of survival and universal security. The Caribbean crisis ended, as you know, in a compromise, the USSR removed Soviet ballistic missiles and Il-28 medium-range bombers. In response, the United States gave guarantees of non-interference in the affairs of Cuba and removed the Jupiter missiles from Turkey, and then from Great Britain and Italy. However, militaristic thinking was far from outlived, continuing to dominate politics.

In September 1970, the London International Institute for Strategic Studies announced that the USSR was approaching nuclear parity with the USA. On February 25, 1971, Americans heard President Nixon say on the radio: "Today, neither the United States nor the Soviet Union has a clear nuclear advantage."

In October of the same year, in preparation for the Soviet-American meeting at highest level, he stated at a press conference: “If there is a new war, if there is a war between superpowers, then no one will win. That is why the moment has come to resolve our differences, to resolve them taking into account our differences of opinion, recognizing that they are still very deep, recognizing, however, that in this moment there is no alternative to negotiations.”

Thus, the recognition of the realities of the nuclear age led in the early 1970s to a revision of policy, to a turn from the Cold War to detente, to cooperation between states with different social systems.

3. Consequences, results and lessons of the cold war

3.1 Political, economic and ideological consequences of the Cold War

The United States constantly sought to preempt the USSR and be the initiators both in politics and in the economy and, especially, in military affairs. First, they rushed to use their advantage, which consisted in the possession of an atomic bomb, then in the development of new types of military equipment and weapons, thereby pushing the Soviet Union to prompt adequate action. Their main goal was to weaken the USSR, to break it up, to tear its allies away from it. By drawing the USSR into the arms race, the United States thus forced it to strengthen the army at the expense of funds intended for internal development, for improving the well-being of the people.

AT last years Some historians accuse the Soviet Union of adopting and implementing measures that supposedly helped the United States pursue its policy of confrontation, to intensify the Cold War. However, the facts say otherwise. My special line The United States, along with the Western Allies, began to exercise with Germany. In the spring of 1947, at a session of the Ministerial Council, representatives of the United States, Britain and France announced their rejection of the decisions previously agreed with the Soviet Union. By their unilateral actions they put in plight eastern zone occupation and consolidated the split of Germany. Having spent in June 1948 in three western zones currency reform, the three powers actually provoked the Berlin crisis, forcing the Soviet occupation authorities to protect the eastern zone from currency fraud and protect its economy and monetary system. For these purposes, a system of checking citizens arriving from West Germany was introduced and the movement of any transport was prohibited in case of refusal to check. The Western occupation authorities forbade the population of the western part of the city from receiving any assistance from East Germany and organized the supply of West Berlin by air, while intensifying anti-Soviet propaganda. Later, such an informed person as J. F. Dulles spoke about the use of the Berlin crisis by Western propaganda.

In line with the Cold War, the Western powers carried out such foreign policy actions as the split of Germany into two states, the creation of a Western military alliance and the signing of the North Atlantic Pact, which was already mentioned above.

This was followed by the creation of military blocs and alliances in different parts of the world under the pretext of ensuring mutual security.

In September 1951 the USA, Australia and New Zealand create a military-political union (ANZUS).

On May 26, 1952, representatives of the USA, England and France, on the one hand, and the FRG, on the other, sign in Bonn a document on the participation of West Germany in the European Defense Community (EOC), and on May 27, the FRG, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg conclude an agreement in Paris on the creation of this bloc.

In September 1954, in Manila, the United States, England, France, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines and Thailand sign the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty (SEATO).

In October 1954 they signed Paris Agreements on the remilitarization of the FRG and its inclusion in the Western Union and NATO. They come into force in May 1955.

In February 1955, a Turkish-Iraqi military alliance (the Baghdad Pact) was created.

The actions of the US and its allies demanded retaliatory measures. On May 14, 1955, a collective defensive alliance of socialist states was formalized - the Warsaw Pact Organization. This was a response to the creation of the NATO military bloc and the inclusion of the FRG in it. The Warsaw Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance was signed by Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia. It was exclusively defensive in nature and was not directed against anyone. Its task was to protect the socialist gains and the peaceful labor of the peoples of the countries participating in the treaty.

In the case of a European system collective security The Warsaw Pact was supposed to lose its force from the date of entry into force of the pan-European treaty.

To make it difficult for the Soviet Union to resolve issues post-war development, the United States imposed a ban on economic ties and trade with the USSR and the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe. The delivery to these countries of even previously ordered and already finished equipment was interrupted, Vehicle and various materials. A list of items prohibited for export to the USSR and other countries of the socialist camp was specially adopted. This created certain difficulties for the USSR, but also caused serious damage to the industrial enterprises of the West.

In September 1951, the American government annulled the trade agreement that had existed since 1937 with the USSR. Adopted at the beginning of January 1952, the second list of goods prohibited for export to the socialist countries was so wide that it included goods from almost all branches of industry.

3.2 Outcomes of the Cold War and whether its outcome was predetermined

What was the Cold War for us, what are its results and lessons from the point of view of the changes that have taken place in the world?

It is hardly legitimate to characterize the Cold War in unilateral terms, either as another conflict in human history or as a lasting peace. J. Gaddis adhered to this point of view. Apparently, this historical phenomenon carried the features of both.

In this regard, I agree with Academician G. Arbatov, who believes that the antagonisms and instability generated by the Second World War carried the same possibility of a military conflict as those that developed after the First World War.

In any case, both the Berlin Crisis of 1953 and, especially, the Caribbean Missile Crisis of October 1962 could well have culminated in a third world war. A general military conflict did not arise only due to the "dissuasive" role of nuclear weapons.

Political scientists and ideologists around the world have tried many times to clearly define the concept of the Cold War and identify its most characteristic features. From the position of today, in conditions when the Cold War has become a thing of the past, it is quite obvious that it was primarily a political course of the confronting parties, pursued from a position of strength on a peculiar ideological basis.

In the economy and trade, this manifested itself in blocs and discriminatory measures against each other. In propaganda activities - in the formation of the "image of the enemy." The goal of such a policy in the West was to contain the spread of communism, to protect the "free world" from it. In the East, the goal of such a policy was also seen in the protection of peoples, but from the "pernicious influence of the decaying Western world."

Now it is futile to look for the fault of any one of the parties as the main cause of the Cold War. Quite obviously, there was a general "blindness", in which instead of political dialogue, preference was given to confrontation between the leading states of the world - the USSR and the USA.

The transition to confrontation happened imperceptibly quickly. Another circumstance of exceptional importance was the fact that nuclear weapons appeared on the world stage.

The Cold War, as a whole complex of phenomena, had a huge impact on overall growth tensions in the world, to the increase in the number, scale and bitterness local conflict ov. There is no doubt that without the established climate of the Cold War, many crises in various regions of the planet would certainly have been able to be extinguished by the concerted efforts of the world community.

Speaking about the features of the Cold War, it should be said that in our country for a long time everything related to nuclear weapons was anathematized. Supposedly for moral reasons. Again, the question arises of what prevented the development of an armed conflict, when the world was literally on the verge of war?

It is, in my opinion, the fear of general annihilation, which has sobered up politicians, reoriented public opinion, forced to remember the eternal moral values.

The fear of mutual destruction has led to the fact that international politics has ceased to be exclusively "the art of diplomats and soldiers." New subjects actively joined in it - scientists, transnational corporations, mass media, public organizations and movements, individuals. They all brought their own interests, beliefs, and goals to it, including those based solely on moral considerations.

So who won this war?

Now, after the passage of time, which put everything in its place, it became clear that the winner was humanity as a whole, since the main result of the Caribbean crisis, as well as the Cold War as a whole, was an unprecedented strengthening of the moral factor in world politics.

Most researchers note the exceptional role of ideology in the Cold War.

In this case, the words spoken by General de Gaulle are true: “since the birth of the world, the banner of ideology has, it seems, covered nothing but human ambitions.” A country that proclaimed itself the bearer of universal moral values ​​unceremoniously discarded morality when it came to its own interests or the ability to win even one point in the political struggle with the enemy.

The question is legitimate: if the policy of the West in post-war history was based not on momentary state interests, but solely on the principles proclaimed in international law, in democratic constitutions, and finally in the biblical precepts, if the demands of morality were addressed primarily to themselves, would there be an arms race and local wars? There is no answer to this question yet, since humanity has not yet accumulated the experience of a policy based on moral principles.

At present, the "triumph" of the United States, won by them in the short term, now seems to the Americans to be something completely different, maybe even a defeat in the long term.

As for the other side, having suffered a defeat in the short term, the Soviet Union, or rather, its heirs, by no means deprived themselves of chances in the long term. Reforms and changes in Russia give her a unique opportunity to answer the questions facing civilization as a whole. The chance that Russia gave to the world today, having saved it from an exhausting arms race and a class approach, it seems to me, can be qualified as a moral achievement. And in this regard, I agree with the authors of the article “Were there any winners in the Cold War” B. Martynov.

This circumstance is also noted by many foreign politicians.

I believe that its outcome was predetermined, since a military balance had developed in the world, and in the event nuclear threat there would be no survivors.

Conclusion

The Cold War, quite naturally, became a kind of fusion of the traditional, forceful confrontation not only between two military blocs, but also between two ideological concepts. Moreover, the struggle around moral values ​​was of a secondary, auxiliary nature. A new conflict was avoided only thanks to the presence of nuclear weapons.

Fear of mutually assured destruction, on the one hand, has become a catalyst for moral progress in the world (the problem of human rights, ecology), and on the other hand, the cause of the economic and political collapse of the society of so-called real socialism (the unbearable burden of the arms race).

As history shows, not a single socio-economic model, no matter how economically effective it is, has a historical perspective, if it is not based on any firm moral postulates, if the meaning of its existence is not oriented towards the achievement of universal humanistic ideals.

The triumph of moral values ​​in politics and in the life of society can become the common victory of mankind as a result of the Cold War. Russia's contribution to achieving this goal determined its position in the world in the long term.

The end of the Cold War should not, however, lull the peoples and governments of the two great states, as well as the entire population. The main task of all healthy, realistically thinking forces of society is to prevent a second return to it. This is also relevant in our time, since, as noted, confrontation is possible due to the deployment of a missile defense system, as well as in connection with conflicts that recent times arose between Russia and Georgia, Russia and Estonia, the former Soviet republics.

Refusal of confrontational thinking, cooperation, mutual consideration of interests and security - such is the general line in relations between countries and peoples living in the nuclear missile era.

The years of the Cold War give grounds for the conclusion that, in opposing communism and revolutionary movements, the United States first of all fought against the Soviet Union, as the country that represented the greatest obstacle in realizing their main goal - establishing their dominance over the world.

Literature

1., Vdovin of Russia. 1938 - 2002. - M.: Aspect-Press, 2003. - 540 p.

2., Pronin G. Truman "spared" the USSR // Military History Journal. - 1996. - No. 3. - S. 74 - 83.

3., Falin unleashed the "cold war" // Pages of the history of Soviet society. - M., 1989. - S. 346 - 357.

4. Wallerstein I. America and the World: Today, Yesterday and Tomorrow // Free Thought. - 1995. - No. 2. - S. 66 - 76.

5. Werth N. History of the Soviet state. 1900 - 1991: Trans. from fr. - 2nd ed., Rev. - M.: Progress-Academy, 1994. - 544 p.

6. Geddis J. Two views on one problem // Pages of the history of Soviet society. - M., 1989. - S. 357 - 362.

7. History of Russia: XX century: Course of lectures / Ed. .- Yekaterinburg: USTU, 1993. - 300 p.

9. Martynov B. Were there any winners in the cold war? // Free thought. - 1996. - No. 12. - S. 3 - 11.

10. The latest history of the Fatherland. XX century. T. 2: Textbook for university students / Ed. , . – M.: VLADOS, 1999. – 448 p.

11. , Elmanova international relations and foreign policy of Russia (1648 - 2000): Textbook for universities / Ed. . - M.: Aspect Press, 2001. - 344 p.

12., Tyazhelnikova Soviet history. / Ed. . – M.: graduate School, 1999. - 414 p.

13. Pages of the history of Soviet society: Facts, problems, people / Under the general. ed. ; Comp. and others - M .: Politizdat, 1989. - 447 p.

14. Fedorov S. From the history of the Cold War // Obozrevatel. - 2000. - No. 1. - S. 51 - 57.

15. Khorkov A. Lessons of the Cold War // Free Thought. - 1995. - No. 12. - S. 67 - 81.

Pages of the history of Soviet society. - M., 1989. - S. 347.

And other history of international relations and foreign policy of Russia. - M.: Aspect Press, 2001. - S. 295.

And other history of international relations and foreign policy of Russia. - M.: Aspect Press, 2001. - S. 296.

Pronin G. Truman "spared" the USSR // Military-Political Journal. - 1996. - No. 3. - P. 77.

Pages of the history of Soviet society. - M., 1989. - S. 365.

And other history of international relations and foreign policy of Russia. - M.: Aspect Press, 2001. - S. 298.

And other history of international relations and foreign policy of Russia. - M.: Aspect Press, 2001. - S. 299.

Martynov B. Were there any winners in the cold war // Svobodnaya mysl'. - 1996. - No. 12. - P. 7.

After the end of World War II, the victorious powers were unable to establish relations with each other. The main contradictions were between the Soviet Union and the United States. Both states began to form military blocs (alliances), which in the event of war would take their side. The confrontation between the USSR and the USA, as well as their allies, was called the Cold War. Despite the fact that there were no hostilities, both states were in a state of almost continuous confrontation (hostility) from the late 1940s to the mid-1970s, constantly increasing their military potential.

The beginning of the Cold War is usually counted from 1946, when the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill delivered his famous speech in the American city of Fulton, in which the Soviet Union was called the main enemy of the Western countries. Between the USSR and the Western world fell " iron curtain". In 1949, the military North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) was created. The NATO bloc included the USA, Great Britain, France, West Germany, Canada, Italy and other Western countries. In 1955, the Soviet Union founded the Warsaw Pact organization. In addition to the USSR, Eastern European countries that were part of the socialist camp joined it.

One of the symbols of the Cold War was a Germany split in two. The border between the two camps (western and socialist) ran right through the city of Berlin, and not symbolic, but real - in 1961 the city was divided into two parts by the Berlin Wall.

Several times during the Cold War, the USSR and the United States were on the brink of war. The most critical moment in this confrontation was the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962). The Soviet Union deployed its missiles on the island of Cuba, the United States' nearest southern neighbor. In response, the United States began preparations for an invasion of Cuba, where Soviet military bases and advisers were already located.

Only personal negotiations between US President John F. Kennedy and USSR leader N.S. Khrushchev averted disaster. The presence of atomic weapons in the United States and the Soviet Union kept the governments of these countries from starting a real "hot" war. In the 1970s, the process of détente began. The USSR and the US signed very important nuclear non-proliferation treaties, but tensions between the two countries persisted.

The arms race consumed the vast resources of both blocs. By the early 1980s, the Soviet Union began to lose heavily in the competition between the two systems. The socialist camp lagged more and more behind the advanced capitalist countries of the West. The Soviet Union was forced to start large-scale reforms - perestroika, which led to radical changes in international politics. The Soviet Union and the United States entered into agreements to limit the arms race and establish new partnerships. The Cold War began to fade into the past. The socialist camp collapsed.

In most of the Warsaw Pact countries, forces came to power that considered the Western world to be their ally. The reunification of Germany in 1990 marked the end of the Cold War.

- 1962 - 1979- The period was marked by an arms race that undermined the economies of rival countries. The development and production of new types of weapons required incredible resources. Despite the presence of tension in relations between the USSR and the USA, agreements on the limitation of strategic weapons are signed. A joint space program "Soyuz-Apollo" is being developed. However, by the beginning of the 80s, the USSR began to lose in the arms race.

- 1979 - 1987. - Relations between the USSR and the USA are again aggravated after the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In 1983 the United States deploys ballistic missiles at bases in Italy, Denmark, England, the FRG, and Belgium. An anti-space defense system is being developed. The USSR reacts to the actions of the West by withdrawing from the Geneva talks. During this period, the missile attack warning system is in constant combat readiness.

- 1987 - 1991- The coming to power in the USSR of Gorbachev in 1985, entailed not only global changes within the country, but also radical changes in foreign policy, called "new political thinking". Ill-conceived reforms finally undermined the economy of the Soviet Union, which led to the country's virtual defeat in the Cold War.

The end of the Cold War was caused by the weakness of the Soviet economy, its inability to support the arms race any longer, and also by the pro-Soviet communist regimes. Anti-war speeches in various parts of the world also played a certain role. The results of the Cold War were depressing for the USSR. A symbol of the victory of the West. was the reunification in 1990 of Germany.

As a result, after the USSR was defeated in the Cold War, a unipolar model of the world was formed with the US as the dominant superpower. However, there are other consequences of the Cold War. This is the rapid development of science and technology, primarily military. So, the Internet was originally created as a communication system for the American army.

Many documentaries have been filmed today feature films about the Cold War period. One of them, which tells in detail about the events of those years, "Heroes and Victims of the Cold War."

War in Korea (participation of the USSR).

Participation of the USSR, USA and China in the Korean War. The role of the UN. Tens of thousands of American soldiers died in the Korean War

It cannot be said that the participation of the above countries in the Korean War was of great importance. In fact, the war was not fought between North and South Korea, but between two powers that sought to prove their priority by any means available. In this case, the United States became the attacking party, and the “Truman Doctrine” proclaimed at that time bright to that example. In line with its "new line of policy" towards the USSR, the Truman administration did not consider it necessary to "make further compromises." She actually refused to comply with the Moscow Agreement, disrupted the work of the Joint Commission on Korea, and then transferred the Korean question to the UN General Assembly.

This US step cut off the last thread of cooperation with the USSR: Washington openly violated its allied obligations, according to which the Korean issue, as a problem of post-war settlement, was to be resolved by the allied powers. The transfer of the Korean question to the UN was required by the United States in order to establish the South Korean regime that they are creating as the only legitimate government in Korea in the international political plan. Thus, as a result of the US imperialist policy and contrary to the desire of the Korean people to create a unified, independent, Democratic Korea, the country was divided into two territories: the Republic of Korea dependent on the United States and the DPRK, which are in the same dependence only on the USSR, the DPRK, in fact, the 38th parallel became the border between them.

It is no coincidence that this happened precisely with the transition of the United States to the policy of the Cold War. The split of the world into two class-opposed camps - capitalism and socialism, the resulting polarization of all political forces on the world stage and the struggle between them led to the emergence of knots of contradictions in the system of international relations, in which the political interests of states of opposing systems collide and are resolved. Korea, due to historical circumstances, has become such a knot. It turned out to be the arena of the struggle of capitalism represented by the United States against the positions of communism. The outcome of the struggle was determined by the balance of power between them.

Both during the Second World War and after it, the USSR consistently strove for a compromise solution of the Korean question, for the creation of a single democratic Korean state through the trusteeship system. Another thing is the United States, there was practically no room for compromise solutions on Korea. The United States deliberately contributed to the growth of tension in Korea, and if they did not take a direct part, then by their policy they actually pushed Seoul to organize an armed conflict on the 38th parallel. But in my opinion, the miscalculation on the part of the United States was that they extended their aggression to China without realizing its capabilities. This is also said by the senior researcher of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Candidate of Historical Sciences A.V. Vorontsov: “One of the decisive events during the war in Korea was the entry of the PRC into it on October 19, 1950, which practically saved the DPRK, which was in a critical situation at that time, from military defeat (this action cost more than two million lives of “Chinese volunteers”)” .

The intervention of American troops in Korea saved Syngman Rhee from military defeat, but the main objective- the elimination of socialism in North Korea - was never achieved. As for the direct participation of the United States in the war, it should be noted that the American air force and navy were active from the very first day of the war, but were used to evacuate American and South Korean citizens from the frontline areas. However, after the fall of Seoul, US ground forces landed on the Korean Peninsula. The US Air Force and Navy also launched active military operations against the troops of the DPRK. In the Korean War, US aviation was the main striking force of the "UN armed forces" that helped South Korea. She acted both at the front and on objects of the deep rear. Therefore, the reflection of air strikes by the US Air Force and its allies has become one of the most important tasks of the North Korean troops and the "Chinese volunteers" throughout the war years.

The help of the Soviet Union to the DPRK during the war years had its own peculiarity - it was intended primarily to repel US aggression and therefore went mainly along the military line. The military assistance of the USSR to the fighting Korean people was carried out through gratuitous deliveries of weapons, military equipment, ammunition and other means; the organization of rebuffing American aviation by formations of Soviet fighter aviation stationed in the border regions of China adjacent to the DPRK and reliably covering various economic and other objects from the air. Also, the USSR was engaged in the training of command, staff and engineering personnel for the troops and institutions of the Korean People's Army on the spot. Throughout the war, combat aircraft, tanks and self-propelled guns, artillery and small arms and ammunition for it, as well as many other types of special equipment and military equipment were supplied from the Soviet Union in the required number. The Soviet side sought to deliver everything on time and without delay, so that the KPA troops were in enough provided with everything necessary to fight the enemy. The KPA army was equipped with the most modern weapons and military equipment for that time.

After the discovery of key documents from the government archives of the countries involved in the Korean conflict, more and more historical documents emerge. We know that the Soviet side assumed at that time the enormous burden of direct air and military-technical support to the DPRK. About 70 thousand personnel of the Soviet Air Force participated in the Korean War. At the same time, the losses of our air connections amounted to 335 aircraft and 120 pilots. As for ground operations to support the North Koreans, Stalin sought to completely shift them to China. Also in the history of this war there is one interesting fact - the 64th Fighter Aviation Corps (JAC). The basis of this corps was three fighter aviation divisions: the 28th Iac, the 50th Iac, the 151st Iac.

The divisions consisted of 844 officers, 1153 sergeants and 1274 soldiers. They were armed with Soviet-made aircraft: IL-10, Yak-7, Yak-11, La-9, La-11, as well as jet MiG-15. The office was located in the city of Mukden. This fact is interesting because Soviet pilots piloted these planes. Considerable difficulties arose because of this. It was necessary to maintain secrecy, since the Soviet command took all measures to hide the participation of the Soviet Air Force in the Korean War, and not to give the United States evidence that Soviet-made MiG-15 fighters, which was not a secret, were piloted by Soviet pilots. To this end, the MiG-15 aircraft had the identification marks of the Chinese Air Force. It was forbidden to operate over the Yellow Sea and pursue enemy aircraft south of the Pyongyang-Wonsan line, that is, up to 39 degrees north latitude.

In this armed clash, a separate role was assigned to the United Nations, which intervened in this conflict after the US government handed over to it the solution of the Korean problem. Despite the protest of the Soviet Union, which insisted that the Korean question was an integral part of the problem of the post-war settlement as a whole and the procedure for its discussion had already been determined by the Moscow Conference, the United States put it up for discussion in the autumn of 1947 for the 2nd session General Assembly UN. These actions were another step towards consolidating the split, towards moving away from the Moscow decisions on Korea and towards the implementation of American plans.

At the November session of the UN General Assembly in 1947, the American delegation and representatives of other pro-American states managed to reject Soviet proposals for the withdrawal of all foreign troops and push through their resolution, create a temporary UN commission on Korea, which was entrusted with supervising the elections. This Commission was elected from representatives of Australia, India, Canada, El Salvador, Syria, Ukraine (its representatives did not participate in the work of the commission), the Philippines, France and Chiang Kai-shek China. It was to carry out the transformation of the UN into a "center for harmonizing actions on the Korean question", to provide the Soviet and American administrations and Korean organizations with "consultations and advice on every step related to the establishment of an independent Korean government and the withdrawal of troops", and to ensure, under its supervision, the conduct of Korea elections based on secret ballot of the entire adult population.

However, the UN Commission in Korea failed to create an all-Korean government, as it continued its course towards the formation of a reactionary authority pleasing to the United States. protests populace and public democratic organizations in the South and North of the country against her activities led to the fact that she was unable to fulfill her functions and turned to the so-called Intersessional Committee of the UN General Assembly for assistance. The Committee recommended to the Temporary Commission, thereby canceling the decision of the UN General Assembly of November 14, 1947, to hold elections to the highest Legislature- The National Assembly is only in South Korea, and introduced the corresponding draft resolution at the meeting of the UN General Assembly. Many states, including Australia and Canada - members of the Interim Commission on Korea - did not support the United States and argued that such an action would result in the permanent division of the country and the presence of two hostile governments in Korea. Nevertheless, with the help of an obedient majority, the United States passed the decision they needed on February 26, 1948, in the absence of a Soviet representative.

The adoption of the American resolution had disastrous consequences for Korea. By encouraging the establishment of a "national government" in South Korea, which inevitably entailed the creation of a national government in the North, it also pushed for the dismemberment of Korea, instead of contributing to the formation of a single independent democratic state. Those who advocated separate elections in the South, such as Syngman Rhee and his supporters, actively supported the decisions of the UN General Assembly, arguing that a strong government was necessary to protect against a North Korean "offensive." The leftists were against separate elections and the activities of the UN Commission, they offered a meeting political leaders North and South Korea to resolve internal affairs themselves after the withdrawal of foreign troops.

It is not difficult to conclude that the UN Commission stood on the side of the United States and worked in its favor. A clear example is the resolution that turned US troops in Korea into "UN armed forces." Formations, units and subunits of 16 countries operated in Korea under the UN flag: England and Turkey sent several divisions, Great Britain equipped 1 aircraft carrier, 2 cruisers, 8 destroyers, marines and auxiliary units, Canada sent one infantry brigade, Australia, France, Greece, Belgium and Ethiopia one infantry battalion each. Additionally, field hospitals and their personnel arrived from Denmark, India, Norway, Italy and Sweden. About two-thirds of the UN troops were American. The Korean War cost the UN 118,155 killed and 264,591 wounded, 92,987 were taken prisoner (most died of starvation and torture).

The death of Stalin, internal party struggle, exposure of the cult of personality

March 5, 1953. died I.V. Stalin, long years at the head of the party and the state. With his death, an entire era ended. Stalin's comrades-in-arms had to not only resolve the issue of the continuity of the socio-economic course, but also divide party and state posts among themselves. Considering that society as a whole was not yet ready for radical changes, it could be more about softening the political regime than about abandoning the Stalinist course. But the possibility of its continuation was quite real. Already March, 6 Stalin's associates proceeded to the first section of leadership positions. The first place in the new hierarchy was taken by G.M. Malenkov, who received the post Chairman of the Council of Ministers and First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU.

In the Council of Ministers, he had four deputies: L.P. Beria, a close associate of Malenkov, who headed the Ministry of Internal Affairs; V.M. Molotov, Minister of Foreign Affairs. Two other posts of deputy chairmen of the Council of Ministers were held by N.A. Bulganin and L.M. Kaganovich. K.E. Voroshilov was appointed chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. N.S. Khrushchev was appointed to the secretariat of the Central Committee of the party. From the very first days, the new leadership took steps against the abuses of the past. Stalin's personal secretariat was dissolved. On March 27, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR announced an amnesty for all prisoners whose term did not exceed five years. In mid-July 1953, at one of the meetings in the Kremlin, which was chaired by G.M. Malenkov, who in those years was the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR N.S. Khrushchev made accusations against L.P. Beria. N.S. Khrushchev was supported by N.A. Bulgarin, V.M. Molotov and others. As soon as they started voting, Malenkov pressed the hidden bell button.

Several high-ranking officers arrested Beria. military side this action was led by G.K. Zhukov. By his order, Kantemirovskaya and Tamanskaya were introduced to Moscow. tank divisions occupied key positions in the city center. This action was carried out by force. However, there was no alternative then. AT September 1953. N.S. Khrushchev was elected First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. By this time, having been in party work since 1924, he had passed all the steps of the apparatus ladder (in the 1930s he was the first secretary of the Moscow organization of the CPSU (b), in 1938 he headed the party leadership of Ukraine, in 1949 he was appointed Secretary of the Moscow City Party Committee). After the elimination of L.P. Beria between G.M. Malenkov and N.S. Khrushchev began conflicts that concerned two main aspects: economy and the role of society in the ongoing changes. As for the economy, the strategy for the development of light industry, advocated by Malenkov, and the "union" of agriculture and heavy industry, proposed by Khrushchev, were opposed here.

Khrushchev spoke of the need to raise purchase prices for the products of collective farms that were on the verge of ruin; on the expansion of sown areas and the development of virgin lands. Khrushchev achieved significant results for the collective farms. increase in public procurement prices(5.5 times for meat, twice for milk and butter, 50% for cereals). The increase in purchase prices was accompanied by the write-off of debts of collective farms, the reduction of taxes on household plots and on sales on the free market. Expansion of cultivated areas, development of virgin lands Northern Kazakhstan, Siberia, Altai and the Southern Urals constituted the second point of Khrushchev's program, the adoption of which he sought at February (1954) plenum of the Central Committee. Over the next three years, 37 million hectares, which was three times more than planned in February 1954 and accounted for approximately 30% of all cultivated land in the USSR at that time, were developed. In 1954, the share of virgin bread in the grain harvest was 50%.

On the Plenum of the Central Committee 1955 (January) N.S. Khrushchev came up with a project corn cultivation to solve the food problem (in practice, this manifested itself in an unprecedented action to introduce this crop, often in regions that are not at all adapted for this). At the same Plenum of the Central Committee, G.M. Malenkov for the so-called “right-wing deviationism” (G.M. Malenkov, unlike N.S. Khrushchev, considered the development of light industry rather than agriculture as a priority). The leadership of the government passed to N.A. Bulganin. Position N.S. Khrushchev in the political leadership of the country has become even stronger. 1953-1956. - this period entered the consciousness of people as " thaw” (based on the title of the novel by I.G. Ehrenburg, published in 1954).

A distinctive feature of this time was not only the holding of economic events that largely ensured the lives of Soviet people, but also softening of the political regime. The “thaw” is characterized by the collegial nature of management. In June 1953, the Pravda newspaper spoke of such management as an obligation to the people. New expressions appear - "the cult of personality", laudatory speeches disappear. In the press during this period, there was not so much a reassessment of Stalin's rule as a decrease in exaltation in relation to the personality of Stalin, frequent quoting of Lenin. The 4,000 political prisoners released in 1953 are the first breach in the repressive system. These are changes, but still unstable, like a “thaw” in early spring. N.S. Khrushchev is gradually gathering allies around him to expose Stalin's personality cult.

"Cold War" is a term used to denote a period in world history from 1946 to 1989, characterized by a confrontation between two political and economic superpowers - the USSR and the USA, which are the guarantors of a new system of international relations created after World War II.

Origin of the term.

It is believed that for the first time the expression "cold war" was used by the famous British science fiction writer George Orwell on October 19, 1945 in the article "You and atomic bomb". In his opinion, the countries possessing nuclear weapons will dominate the world, while between them there will be a constant "cold war", that is, a confrontation without direct military clashes. His prediction can be called prophetic, since at the end of the war the United States had a monopoly on nuclear weapons. At the official level, this expression sounded in April 1947 from the lips of US presidential adviser Bernard Baruch.

Churchill's Fulton speech

After the end of World War II, relations between the USSR and the Western allies began to deteriorate rapidly. Already in September 1945, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved the idea of ​​the United States delivering a first strike against a potential enemy (meaning the use of nuclear weapons). On March 5, 1946, the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, in his speech at Westminster College in Fulton, USA, in the presence of American President Harry Truman, formulated the goals of "a fraternal association of peoples who speak English", calling on them to rally to protect "the great principles of freedom and rights person." “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended over the European continent,” and “Soviet Russia wants ... the unlimited spread of its power and its doctrines.” Churchill's Fulton speech is considered a turning point in the beginning of the Cold War between East and West.

"Truman Doctrine"

In the spring of 1947, the President of the United States promulgated his "Truman Doctrine" or the "containment of communism" doctrine, according to which "the world as a whole must accept the American system" and the United States is obliged to fight any revolutionary movement, any claims of the Soviet Union. The decisive factor was the conflict between the two ways of life. One of them, according to Truman, was based on individual rights, free elections, legal institutions and guarantees against aggression. The other is in control of the press and the media mass media, imposing the will of the minority on the majority, on terror and oppression.

One of the instruments of containment was the American plan for economic assistance, announced on June 5, 1947 by US Secretary of State J. Marshall, who announced the provision of gratuitous assistance to Europe, which would be directed "not against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, despair and chaos."

Initially, the USSR and the countries of Central Europe showed interest in the plan, but after negotiations in Paris, a delegation of 83 Soviet economists headed by V.M. Molotov left them at the direction of V.I. Stalin. The 16 countries that joined the plan received significant assistance from 1948 to 1952; its implementation actually completed the division of spheres of influence in Europe. The Communists lost their positions in Western Europe.

Cominformburo

In September 1947, at the first meeting of the Cominformburo (Information Bureau of the Communist and Workers' Parties), A.A. Zhdanov about the formation of two camps in the world - "the imperialist and anti-democratic camp, which has as its main goal the establishment of world domination and the defeat of democracy, and the anti-imperialist and democratic camp, which has as its main goal the undermining of imperialism, the strengthening of democracy and the elimination of the remnants of fascism." The creation of the Cominformburo meant the emergence single center leadership of the world communist movement. In Eastern Europe, the communists completely take power into their own hands, many opposition politicians go into exile. Socio-economic transformations on the Soviet model begin in the countries.

Berlin Crisis

The Berlin Crisis became the stage of deepening of the Cold War. Back in 1947. Western allies set a course for the creation of the territories of the American, British and French occupation zones of the West German state. In turn, the USSR tried to oust the allies from Berlin (the western sectors of Berlin were an isolated enclave inside Soviet zone occupation). As a result, the “Berlin Crisis” occurred, i.e. transport blockade of the western part of the city by the USSR. However, in May 1949, the USSR lifted restrictions on transportation to West Berlin. In the autumn of the same year, the division of Germany took place: in September the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) was created, in October the German democratic republic(GDR). An important consequence of the crisis was the establishment by the US leadership of the largest military-political bloc: 11 states of Western Europe and the United States signed the North Atlantic Mutual Defense Treaty (NATO), according to which each of the parties undertook to provide immediate military assistance in the event of an attack on any country that is part of block. Greece and Turkey joined the pact in 1952, and the FRG in 1955.

"Arms race"

Another feature Cold War became an arms race. In April 1950, the directive of the National Security Council "U.S. National Security Goals and Programs" (SNB-68) was adopted, which was based on the following provision: "The USSR is striving for world domination, Soviet military superiority is increasingly increasing, in connection with than negotiations with the Soviet leadership are impossible. Hence the conclusion was drawn about the need to build up the American military potential. The directive focused on a crisis confrontation with the USSR "until there is a change in the nature of the Soviet system." Thus, the USSR was forced to join the arms race imposed on it. In 1950-1953 the first armed local conflict involving two superpowers took place in Korea.

After the death of I.V. Stalin, the new Soviet leadership, headed by G.M. Malenkov, and then took a number of major steps to mitigate international tension. Declaring that "there is no such controversial or unresolved issue that could not be resolved peacefully", the Soviet government agreed with the United States to end the Korean War. In 1956 N.S. Khrushchev proclaimed a course to prevent war and declared that "there is no fatal inevitability of war." Later, the Program of the CPSU (1962) emphasized: “The peaceful coexistence of socialist and capitalist states is an objective necessity for the development of human society. War cannot and should not serve as a way to resolve international disputes.

In 1954, Washington accepted military doctrine"massive retaliation", which provided for the use of the full power of the American strategic potential in the event of an armed conflict with the USSR in any region. But in the late 50s. the situation changed dramatically: in 1957 the Soviet Union launched the first artificial satellite, in 1959 it commissioned the first submarine with a nuclear reactor on board. In the new conditions for the development of weapons nuclear war lost its meaning, since it would not have had a winner in advance. Even taking into account the superiority of the United States in the number of accumulated nuclear weapons, nuclear missile potential The USSR was enough to inflict "unacceptable damage" on the US.

In the circumstances of the nuclear confrontation, a series of crises occurred: on May 1, 1960, an American reconnaissance aircraft was shot down over Yekaterinburg, the pilot Harry Powers was captured; in October 1961, the Berlin crisis erupted, the "Berlin Wall" appeared, and a year later the famous Caribbean crisis occurred, which brought all mankind to the brink of nuclear war. The onset of détente was a peculiar outcome of the crises: on August 5, 1963, the USSR, Great Britain and the USA signed in Moscow an agreement banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water, and in 1968 an agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

In the 60s. when the Cold War was in full swing, in the face of confrontation between two military blocs (NATO and the Warsaw Pact since 1955), Eastern Europe was under the complete control of the USSR, and Western Europe in a strong military-political and economic alliance with the United States, the countries of the "third world" became the main arena of the struggle between the two systems, which often led to local military conflicts around the world.

"Discharge"

By the 1970s, the Soviet Union had reached approximate military-strategic parity with the United States. Both superpowers acquired the possibility of "guaranteed retaliation", i. causing unacceptable damage to a potential adversary by retaliatory strike.

In his message to Congress on February 18, 1970, President R. Nixon outlined three components of US foreign policy: partnership, military force, and negotiations. The partnership concerned allies, military strength and negotiations - "potential adversaries."

What is new here is the attitude towards the enemy, expressed in the formula "from confrontation to negotiations." On May 29, 1972, the countries signed the “Fundamentals of Relations between the USSR and the USA, emphasizing the need for peaceful coexistence of the two systems. Both sides pledged to do everything possible to prevent military conflicts and nuclear war.

The structural documents of these intentions were the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM) and the Interim Agreement on Certain Measures in the Field of Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT-1), which establishes a limit on the build-up of weapons. Later, in 1974, the USSR and the USA signed a protocol by which they agreed to missile defense only one area: the USSR covered Moscow, and the USA - a base for launching interballistic missiles in the state of North Dakota. The ABM Treaty was in effect until 2002, when the US withdrew from it. The result of the policy of "détente" in Europe was the holding of the All-European Conference on Security and Cooperation in Helsinki in 1975 (CSCE), which proclaimed the renunciation of the use of force, the inviolability of borders in Europe, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In 1979, in Geneva, at a meeting between US President J. Carter and the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, a new treaty on the limitation of strategic offensive arms (SALT-2) was signed, reducing total nuclear launchers up to 2400 and providing for containment of the process of modernization of strategic weapons. However, after the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan in December 1979, the United States refused to ratify the treaty, although its clauses were partially observed by both sides. At the same time, a rapid reaction force was being created to protect American interests anywhere in the world.

Third World

Apparently, in the late 70's. in Moscow, there was a point of view that in the conditions of the achieved parity and the policy of "détente", it is the USSR that has the foreign policy initiative: there is an increase and modernization of conventional weapons in Europe, the deployment of medium-range missiles, a large-scale build-up of naval forces, Active participation in support of friendly regimes in third world countries. Under these conditions, a course of confrontation prevailed in the United States: in January 1980, the president proclaimed the "Carter Doctrine", according to which Persian Gulf declared a zone of American interests and allowed the use of armed force to protect it.

With the coming to power of R. Reagan, a large-scale modernization program was undertaken various types weapons using new technologies, which had the goal of achieving strategic superiority over the USSR. It was Reagan who famously said that the USSR is an "evil empire", and America is "a people chosen by God" to carry out a "sacred plan" - "to leave Marxism-Leninism in the ashes of history." In 1981-1982 restrictions on trade with the USSR were introduced; intercontinental missiles. At the end of 1983, the governments of Great Britain, Germany and Italy agreed to deploy American missiles on their territory.

End of the Cold War

The last stage of the Cold War is associated with major changes that took place in the USSR after the new leadership of the country came to power, led by a policy of "new political thinking" in foreign policy. A real breakthrough was made at the highest level between the USSR and the USA in November 1985, the parties came to the unanimous opinion that "a nuclear war should not be unleashed, there can be no winners in it", and their goal is "to prevent an arms race in space and its termination on Earth. In December 1987, a new Soviet-American meeting was held in Washington, which ended with the signing of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate and Shorter-Range Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Missiles (from 500 to 5.5 thousand km). These measures included regular mutual control over the implementation of agreements, thus for the first time in history an entire class was destroyed. the latest weapons. In 1988, the concept of "freedom of choice" was formulated in the USSR as a universal principle of international relations, the Soviet Union began to withdraw its troops from Eastern Europe.

In November 1989, a symbol of the Cold War, a concrete wall separating West and East Berlin, was destroyed during spontaneous demonstrations. In Eastern Europe, a series of "velvet revolutions" is taking place, the communist parties are losing power. On December 2-3, 1989, a meeting was held in Malta between the new US President George W. Bush and M.S. Gorbachev, at which the latter confirmed the "freedom of choice" for the countries of Eastern Europe, proclaimed a course for a 50% reduction in strategic offensive weapons. The Soviet Union was giving up its zone of influence in Eastern Europe. Following the meeting, M.S. Gorbachev declared that "the world is emerging from the era of the Cold War and is entering a new era." For his part, George Bush emphasized that "the West will not try to extract any advantage from the unusual changes taking place in the East." In March 1991, the official dissolution of the Department of Internal Affairs took place, in December the collapse of the Soviet Union took place.