DOCSLIB.ORG

YUGOSLAV-SOVIET RELATIONS, 1953- 1957: Normalization, Comradeship, Confrontation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
YUGOSLAV-SOVIET RELATIONS, 1953- 1957: Normalization, Comradeship, Confrontation YUGOSLAV-SOVIET RELATIONS, 1953- 1957: Normalization, Comradeship, Confrontation Svetozar Rajak Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy London School of Economics and Political Science University of London February 2004 UMI Number: U615474 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615474 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ” OF POUTICAL «, AN0 pi Th ^ s^ s £ £2^>3 ^7&2io 2 ABSTRACT The thesis chronologically presents the slow improvement of relations between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, starting with Stalin’s death on 5 March 1953, through their full normalization in 1955 and 1956, to the renewed ideological confrontation at the end of 1956. The normalization of Yugoslav-Soviet relations brought to an end a conflict between Yugoslavia and the Eastern Bloc, in existence since 1948, which threatened the status quo in Europe. The thesis represents the first effort at comprehensively presenting the reconciliation between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, between 1953 and 1957. It will also explain the motives that guided the leaderships of the two countries, in particular the two main protagonists, Josip Broz Tito and Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, throughout this process. It will also provide insight into the reasons behind the collapse of this process in the beginning of 1957. The thesis will establish that the significance of the Yugoslav-Soviet reconciliation went far beyond the bilateral relations between the two countries. It had significant ramifications on relations in the Eastern Bloc and in the global Communist movement, and on the dynamics of the Cold W ar world at its crucial juncture. The reconciliation had brought forward the process of de-Stalinization in the USSR and in Peoples’ Democracies; it had also encouraged the process of liberalization throughout Eastern Europe and had helped Khrushchev win the post-Stalin leadership contest. Finally, the reconciliation had enabled Yugoslavia to acquire equidistance from both Blocs and to successfully embark upon creating, together with India and Egypt the new entity in the bi-polar Cold War world - the Non-aligned movement. The unique contribution of this thesis is that it is based on the research of the Yugoslav and Russian archives; it brings into the Cold W ar scholarship a great number of previously unresearched documents. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s tra c t page 2 Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 CHAPTER I: Overtures 19 1.1 Yugoslavia’s National Security Crisis 21 1.2 Stalin’s Death 32 1.3 Soviet Overtures 45 1.4 Implications of the October 1953 Trieste Crisis 59 CHAPTER II: Normalization 84 11.1 Establishment of Direct Communication 85 11.2 Continuation of Tito-Khrushchev Correspondence 108 11.3 The Impasse 139 CHAPTER III: Comradeship 153 111.1 Khrushchev’s Visit to Yugoslavia 155 111.2 Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee 183 111.3 Rapprochement 210 111.4 Comradeship 224 CHAPTER IV: Confrontation 236 IV.1 Tito’s Visit to the USSR 238 IV.2 'Containment’ of Yugoslavia 256 IV.3 Deterioration of Yugoslav-Soviet Relations 281 IV.4 Confrontation 296 Conclusions 334 Bibliography 347 4 INTRODUCTION The Yugoslav-Soviet reconciliation between 1953 and 1957, which is the subject of this thesis, was the second and concluding half of the historic drama that had started in 1948. In June 1948 the World was shocked to learn of the Yugoslav-Soviet confrontation. As a bolt from the blue, a rupture appeared in what was perceived to be the impermeable, monolithic Communist Bloc. The news was received with equal disbelief on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Hitherto, Yugoslavia had been considered the most doctrinaire of the Socialist regimes and the most reliable pillar in the Stalinist edifice. On 28 June, at its extraordinary session in Bucharest, the COMINFORM issued a Resolution accusing Tito and the Yugoslav leadership of conducting policies aimed against the Soviet Union and the All Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), and of abandoning Marxism-Leninism. The Resolution openly encouraged ' healthy elements in the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CPY)’ to replace Tito and his closest associates with a 'new, internationalist leadership '.1 The Resolution was never officially sent to Belgrade. Yugoslav leaders learned of it when it was published in the East European press on 29 June. Following ideological disqualification, Yugoslavia was immediately subjected to concrete pressure from the Peoples’ Democracies. They began unilaterally 1 The Resolution of the Information Bureau on the situation in the CPY, Bucharest, 28 June 1948, in Dokumenti o spoljnoj politici Socijalisticke Federativne Republike Jugoslavije: 1945- 1950 [Documents on the Foreign Policy of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia: 1945-1950] (Beograd: Savezni sekretarijat za inostrane poslova / Institut za medjunarodnu politiku i privredu / Jugoslavenski pregled, 1984), 621-7. 5 cancelling existing agreements on trade and economic cooperation with Belgrade.2 Simultaneously, a vicious anti-Yugoslav propaganda campaign was initiated throughout Eastern Europe and in the USSR.3 In response, Tito and his associates successfully rallied the CPY membership and Yugoslav public opinion in support of their resistance to Stalin’s hegemony. The Fifth Congress of the CPY (the first since 1940) was convened in Belgrade between 21 and 28 July. I tapproved ‘ the position of the Central Committee (CC) of the CPY’. It also declared the Soviet and COMINFORM accusations to be ' untrue, incorrect, and unjust’.* The fault lines of the Yugoslav-Soviet conflict were thus defined. By the end of 1948, the Soviet Union and Peoples’ Democracies had imposed on Yugoslavia a full economic blockade. Its economy came on the verge of collapse. The threat of famine became real and would remain so for several years after 1948. The gravity of the situation can only be appreciated given the fact that Yugoslavia had emerged from the Second World War devastated; its proportional losses in human life in this conflict had been second only to that of Poland. In addition, between 1945 and 1948, following doctrinarian Stalinist concepts, the Yugoslav leadership had subordinated their country’s economy to the idivision of labour’ within the Socialist camp5, making it fully dependant on Soviet assistance.6 2 Note of the Government of FNRJ [Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia] to the Government of Peoples Republic of Albania regarding unilateral cancellation of economic contracts, agreements, and conventions, 2 July 1948, in Dokumenti of spoljnoj...(1948), 189-93. 3 Statement by the Federal Assembly of the FNRJ on the propaganda campaign by the Information Bureau, Belgrade, 30 September 1948, in Dokumenti o spoljnoj...(1948), 373-6. 4 Resolution of the Fifth Congress of the CPY on relations with the Information Bureau, in Dokumenti of spoljnoj...(1948), 266-7. 5 The Socialist ‘camp’or ‘lager1 were commonly used by the Soviet and Satellite officials to depict the Soviet Bloc and would henceforth be used in the text. 6 Speech by President J.B. Tito at the Fourth (extraordinary) session of the Federal Assembly of FNRJ on the economic development of Yugoslavia in 1948, Belgrade, 27 December 1948, in Dokumenti of spoljnoj...(1948), 488-90. For more detailed analysis of the consequences of the blockade and Yugoslavia’s consequent dire economic situation post-1948, see Chapters I and II. 6 However, the likelihood of the Soviet and Satellite military aggression posed the biggest threat to the survival of Tito’s regime. Within months of the COMINFORM Resolution, armed incidents, clashes and infiltration of armed groups became daily occurrences on Yugoslavia’s borders with the Satellite countries. Between 1948 and 1953, 7,877 border incidents took place, of which 142 were characterized as ‘substantive’ clashes. Between 1948 and 1952, threatened by the prospect of a military aggression from Eastern Europe, Yugoslavia was forced to increase its military budget ten-fold to US $655 million. At the same time, in the first two years of the economic blockade, the economy of war-torn Yugoslavia sustained losses amounting to US$429 million.7 Within a year after the COMINFORM Resolution, diplomatic relations between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union and its allies effectively lapsed. Diplomatic missions were reduced to skeleton staffs, which were subjected to absurd restrictions on their movements and to intimidating surveillance and harassment. Between 1948 and 1953, 145 Yugoslav diplomats were expelled from the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries.8 In August 1949, the Yugoslav leadership became convinced that Stalin was contemplating an attack on Yugoslavia. During the previous months, the Yugoslav authorities had arrested a group of White Russian emigres, who had settled in Yugoslavia after the October Revolution. A number of them had 7 Vladimir Dedijer, Novi Prilozi za Biografiju Josipa Broza Tita,[ The New Supplements to the Biography of Josip Broz Tito] Volume 3, (Beograd:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Brezhnev Era (1964–1982)
    Name _______________________________________________ Date _____________ The Brezhnev Era (1964–1982) Next to Stalin, Leonid Brezhnev ruled the Soviet Union longer than any other leader. Brezhnev and his supporters stressed the ties with the Stalinist era by focusing on his good points and ignoring his crimes. 1. What is the KGB? Brezhnev strengthened the Soviet bureaucracy as well What was its as the KGB (Committee of State Security)—formed in purpose? (list 2) 1954; its mission was to defend the Soviet government from its enemies at home and abroad. The KGB suppressed dissidents who spoke out against the government at home and in the satellite countries. The Soviets also invested in a large military buildup and were determined to never again suffer a humiliating defeat, as happened in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Yet Brezhnev proceeded cautiously in the mid-1960s and sought to avoid confrontation with the West. He was determined, however, to protect Soviet interests. Brezhnev Doctrine (1968) 2. What was the Prague In 1968, Alexander Dubček (1921–1992) became head of the Czechoslovakia Spring? Communist Party and began a series of reforms known as the Prague Spring reforms, which sought to make communism more humanistic. He lifted censorship, permitted non-communists to form political groups, and wanted to trade with the West, but still remain true to communist ideals. Brezhnev viewed these reforms as a capitalistic threat to the socialist ideologies of communism and, in August of 1968, sent over 500,000 Soviet and Eastern European troops 3. How did Brezhnev to occupy Czechoslovakia. In the Brezhnev Doctrine, he defended the Soviet react to the Prague military invasion of Czechoslovakia, saying in effect, that antisocialist elements Spring? in a single socialist country can compromise the entire socialist system, and thus other socialist countries have the right to intervene militarily if they see the need to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Yalta Conference
    Yalta Conference 1 The Conference All three leaders were attempting to establish an agenda for governing post-war Europe. They wanted to keep peace between post-world war countries. On the Eastern Front, the front line at the end of December 1943 re- mained in the Soviet Union but, by August 1944, So- viet forces were inside Poland and parts of Romania as part of their drive west.[1] By the time of the Conference, Red Army Marshal Georgy Zhukov's forces were 65 km (40 mi) from Berlin. Stalin’s position at the conference was one which he felt was so strong that he could dic- tate terms. According to U.S. delegation member and future Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, "[i]t was not a question of what we would let the Russians do, but what Yalta Conference in February 1945 with (from left to right) we could get the Russians to do.”[2] Moreover, Roosevelt Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin. Also hoped for a commitment from Stalin to participate in the present are Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov (far left); United Nations. Field Marshal Sir Alan Brooke, Admiral of the Fleet Sir Andrew Cunningham, RN, Marshal of the RAF Sir Charles Portal, RAF, Premier Stalin, insisting that his doctors opposed any (standing behind Churchill); General George C. Marshall, Chief long trips, rejected Roosevelt’s suggestion to meet at the of Staff of the United States Army, and Fleet Admiral William Mediterranean.[3] He offered instead to meet at the Black D. Leahy, USN, (standing behind Roosevelt).
    [Show full text]
  • The Balkan Entente in Turkish-Yugoslav Relations
    Middle Eastern Studies ISSN: 0026-3206 (Print) 1743-7881 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fmes20 The Balkan Entente in Turkish–Yugoslav relations (1934–41): the Yugoslav perspective Dilek Barlas & Anđelko Vlašić To cite this article: Dilek Barlas & Anđelko Vlašić (2016) The Balkan Entente in Turkish–Yugoslav relations (1934–41): the Yugoslav perspective, Middle Eastern Studies, 52:6, 1011-1024, DOI: 10.1080/00263206.2016.1198328 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2016.1198328 Published online: 18 Aug 2016. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 113 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fmes20 Download by: [Koc University] Date: 16 January 2017, At: 00:18 MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES, 2016 VOL. 52, NO. 6, 1011À1024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2016.1198328 The Balkan Entente in TurkishÀYugoslav relations (1934À41): the Yugoslav perspective Dilek Barlasa and Anđelko Vlasicb aDepartment of History, Koc¸ University, _Istanbul, Turkey; bCroatian Institute of History, Branch for the History of Slavonia, Syrmia and Baranya, Slavonski Brod, Croatia Most of the works written in Turkey on the formation of the Balkan Entente in 1934 and its effects on the region reflect the Turkish perspective. This perspective intended to glorify the role of Turkey, by emphasizing how Ankara initiated such a pact and was able to con- vince other Balkan countries to participate in its establishment. In other words, the Turkish perspective underlined how Ankara’s policy was driven not by self-interest, but by the interests of all Balkan countries during the formation of the Balkan Entente.1 However, in other Balkan countries, there exist more nuanced views of the Balkan Entente and the Turkish role in its formation.
    [Show full text]
  • France and the Dissolution of Yugoslavia Christopher David Jones, MA, BA (Hons.)
    France and the Dissolution of Yugoslavia Christopher David Jones, MA, BA (Hons.) A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of East Anglia School of History August 2015 © “This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived there from must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution.” Abstract This thesis examines French relations with Yugoslavia in the twentieth century and its response to the federal republic’s dissolution in the 1990s. In doing so it contributes to studies of post-Cold War international politics and international diplomacy during the Yugoslav Wars. It utilises a wide-range of source materials, including: archival documents, interviews, memoirs, newspaper articles and speeches. Many contemporary commentators on French policy towards Yugoslavia believed that the Mitterrand administration’s approach was anachronistic, based upon a fear of a resurgent and newly reunified Germany and an historical friendship with Serbia; this narrative has hitherto remained largely unchallenged. Whilst history did weigh heavily on Mitterrand’s perceptions of the conflicts in Yugoslavia, this thesis argues that France’s Yugoslav policy was more the logical outcome of longer-term trends in French and Mitterrandienne foreign policy. Furthermore, it reflected a determined effort by France to ensure that its long-established preferences for post-Cold War security were at the forefront of European and international politics; its strong position in all significant international multilateral institutions provided an important platform to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J
    STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 11 Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for Complex Operations, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, and Conflict Records Research Center. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Unified Combatant Commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Kathleen Bailey presents evidence of forgeries to the press corps. Credit: The Washington Times Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference By Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 11 Series Editor: Nicholas Rostow National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2012 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Nasserism 1 Nasserism
    Nasserism 1 Nasserism Nasserism Ideology Arab nationalism, Pan-Arabism, Arab socialism Nasserism is an Arab nationalist political ideology based on the thinking of the former Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. It was a major influence on pan-Arab politics in the 1950s and 1960s, and continues to have significant resonance throughout the Arab World to this day. It also metamorphosed into other nationalist movements during the 1970s. However, the scale of the Arab defeat in the Six Day War of 1967 severely damaged the standing of Nasser, and the ideology associated with him. Nasser himself died in 1970, and certain important tenets of Nasserism were revised or abandoned totally by his successor as Egyptian President, Anwar El-Sadat. During Nasser's lifetime, Nasserist groups were encouraged and often supported financially by Egypt, to the extent that many became seen as willing agents of the Egyptian Government. Ideology Nasserism is an Arab nationalist and pan-Arab ideology, combined with a vaguely defined socialism, often distinguished from Eastern bloc or Western socialist thought by the label 'Arab socialism'. Though opposed ideologically to Western capitalism, Arab socialism also developed as a rejection of communism, which was seen as incompatible with Arab traditions, and the religious underpinnings of Arab society. As a consequence, Nasserists from the 1950s to the 1980s sought to prevent the rise of communism in the Arab World, and advocated harsh penalties for individuals and organizations identified as attempting to spread communism within the region. Though mindful of the Islamic and Christian heritage of the Arab World, as with Ba'athism, Nasserism is largely a secular ideology.[1] [2] Just as with other manifestations of Arab nationalism, this led to direct conflict with Islamic orientated Arab political movements from the 1950s onwards, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood.
    [Show full text]
  • KGB Spy War with U.S. Falls Victim to Glasnost Soviet Intelligence Ief to Revamp Agency Atm C4 Ttifve,L
    KGB Spy War With U.S. Falls Victim to Glasnost Soviet Intelligence ief to Revamp Agency Atm c4 ttifve,L. *By Michael dobbs Washington Post Foreign Service MOSCOW, Oct. 2—Abandoning the shadowy anonymity favored by his predecessors, the Kremlin's new spymaster declared an end to- day to the secret intelligence war with the United States and prom- ised to put a stop to the practice of sending Soviet agents abroad under journalistic cover. Yevgeny Primakov, who was nominated as the Soviet Union's top spy two days ago by President Mikhail Gorbachev, told a news conference that he was in favor of greater glasnost, or openness, in the intelligence business. He said that his agency would follow the example of the U.S. CIA by making YEVGENY PRIMAKOV some of its information available to ... "we must use analytical methods" scholars and businessmen in addi- tion to the government. "If you think that spies are people into a professional intelligence- in gray coats, skulking around gathering organization along the street corners, listening to people's lines of the CIA. His appointment conversations and wielding iron comes at a time when both the KGB bars, then my appointment is un, and its foreign intelligence arm are natural," said Primakov, 61, a for- in the throes of major internal up- mer journalist and academic who heavals following August's abortive served as Gorbachev's chief diplo- coup by hard-line Communists. matic trouble-shooter. "We must The First Chief Directorate, as use analytical methods, synthesize the foreign intelligence service has information.
    [Show full text]
  • Evanthis Hatzivassiliou Greek-Yugoslav Relations Is A
    Evanthis Hatzivassiliou From Adversity to Alliance: Greece, Yugoslavia and Balkan Strategy, 1944-1959 Greek-Yugoslav relations is a subject of pivotal importance for understanding the shaping of twentieth century Balkan balances. In the post-war period this relationship became even more interesting: Greece and Yugoslavia had radically different political, economic and social systems; they were bitterly divided in 1944-1948, but then they norma­ lized relations, participated in a Balkan alliance together with Turkey, and when this alliance broke down, they continued their co-operation on a bilateral basis. In this paper it will be argued that the factor which divi­ ded Greece and Yugoslavia in 1944-1948 was not ideology, but strate­ gy; and it was strategy that brought them closer after Tito’s split with Stalin. After 1948 both countries shaped their policy on the basis of a mild realism, and their relationship was dominated by their perception of their respective national interests. In this paper, emphasis will be placed on Greek perceptions and assessments, but Yugoslav views will also be mentioned. I During the inter-war period Greece’s major problem with Yugo­ slavia derived from the latter’s great size: Belgrade was a powerful neighbour, capable of pressing Athens and of attracting support from the great powers, mainly France. At that time Greece was afraid of Yugo­ slavia’s hegemonist tendencies in the Balkans, as well as of its desire to pose as the protector of the Slav-speaking minority of Greece and as a suitor for the port of Thessaloniki. It was clear that, facing Bulgarian revisionism, it would be impossible for Athens to resist pressures from both its northern neighbours; this was why the possibility of a Bulgarian- Yugoslav rapprochement was the nightmare scenario of the Athens policy-makers'.
    [Show full text]
  • Yugoslav Destruction After the Cold War
    STASIS AMONG POWERS: YUGOSLAV DESTRUCTION AFTER THE COLD WAR A dissertation presented by Mladen Stevan Mrdalj to The Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Political Science Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts December 2015 STASIS AMONG POWERS: YUGOSLAV DESTRUCTION AFTER THE COLD WAR by Mladen Stevan Mrdalj ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities of Northeastern University December 2015 2 Abstract This research investigates the causes of Yugoslavia’s violent destruction in the 1990’s. It builds its argument on the interaction of international and domestic factors. In doing so, it details the origins of Yugoslav ideology as a fluid concept rooted in the early 19th century Croatian national movement. Tracing the evolving nationalist competition among Serbs and Croats, it demonstrates inherent contradictions of the Yugoslav project. These contradictions resulted in ethnic outbidding among Croatian nationalists and communists against the perceived Serbian hegemony. This dynamic drove the gradual erosion of Yugoslav state capacity during Cold War. The end of Cold War coincided with the height of internal Yugoslav conflict. Managing the collapse of Soviet Union and communism imposed both strategic and normative imperatives on the Western allies. These imperatives largely determined external policy toward Yugoslavia. They incentivized and inhibited domestic actors in pursuit of their goals. The result was the collapse of the country with varying degrees of violence. The findings support further research on international causes of civil wars.
    [Show full text]
  • September 15, 1959 Mikihail Zimyanin's Background Report for Khrushchev on China (Excerpt)
    Digital Archive digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org International History Declassified September 15, 1959 Mikihail Zimyanin's Background Report for Khrushchev on China (Excerpt) Citation: “Mikihail Zimyanin's Background Report for Khrushchev on China (Excerpt),” September 15, 1959, History and Public Policy Program Digital Archive, TsKhSD Fond 5, Opis’ 30, Delo 307, Listy 49-79. http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/117030 Summary: Mikhail Zimyanin, head of the Soviet Foreign Ministry’s Far Eastern department, reports to Khrushchev on the “new stage” in Sino-Soviet relations after the victory of the people’s revolution in China; China and the Soviet Union now share the common goal of developing socialist societies in their respective countries. Credits: This document was made possible with support from the Leon Levy Foundation. Original Language: Russian Contents: English Translation The victory of the people’s revolution in China and the establishment of the Chinese People’s Republic marked the start of a qualitatively new stage in relations between the peoples of the Soviet Union and China, based on a commonality of interests and a unity of goals in constructing a socialist and Communist society in both countries. … When discussing the overall success of the development of Soviet-Chinese relations during the first three years after the formation of the PRC, we must not overlook several negative features of these relations connected with the violation of the sovereign rights and interests of the Chinese People’s Republic, as reflected
    [Show full text]
  • Soviet-American Relations and the Origins of Containment 1941-1946: the Force of Tradition
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1988 Soviet-American relations and the origins of containment 1941-1946: The force of tradition Anita Louise Coryell The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Coryell, Anita Louise, "Soviet-American relations and the origins of containment 1941-1946: The force of tradition" (1988). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 5179. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/5179 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1976 Th i s is an unpublished m a n u s c r ip t in w h ic h c o p y r ig h t s u b s i s t s . Any f u r t h e r r e p r in t in g of i t s c o n t e n t s m u st be APPROVED BY THE AUTHOR. Ma n s f i e l d L ib r a r y U n i v e r s i t y of Mo n ta n a Da t e : , 1 , SOVIET-AMERICAN RELATIONS AND THE ORIGINS OF CONTAINMENT, 1941-1946: THE FORCE OF TRADITION By Anita Louise Coryell B.A., Rutgers, The State University, 1974 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1988 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners Dean, Graduate School lusrt/J Date UMI Number: EP40643 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marshall Plan and the Cold War ______
    Background Essay: The Marshall Plan and the Cold War _____________________________________________ The Cold War was fought with words and threats rather than violent action. The two nations at war were the United States and the Soviet Union. Although the two superpowers had worked as allies to defeat Germany during World War II, tensions between them grew after the war. Feelings of mistrust and resentment began to form as early as the 1945 Potsdam Conference, where Harry S. Truman and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin met. Stalin was interested in expanding Russia’s power into Eastern Europe, and the U.S. feared that Russia was planning to take over the world and spread the political idea of Communism. Truman’s response to the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence and current conditions of war-torn Europe would become known as the Truman Doctrine. This doctrine proposed to give aid to countries that were suffering from the aftermath of World War II and threatened by Soviet oppression. The U.S. was especially concerned about Greece and Turkey. Due to the slow progress of Europe’s economic development following WWII, Truman devised another plan to offer aid called the Marshall Plan. The plan was named after Secretary of State George Marshall due to Truman’s respect for his military achievements. Truman hoped that by enacting the Marshall Plan two main goals would be accomplished. These goals were: 1.) It would lead to the recovery of production abroad, which was essential both to a vigorous democracy and to a peace founded on democracy and freedom, and which, in the eyes of the United States, the Soviet Union had thus far prevented.
    [Show full text]