New alignment of forces in the international arena after World War II. Foreign policy of the USSR in the era of the "Cold War. Foreign policy. After World War II, the alignment of forces in the international arena has changed dramatically

Question 01. How has the placement of forces changed in the international arena after World War II?

Answer. Before World War II, the mainstream was the confrontation of the fascist and western blocks. The USSR, who did not have its own block (except for Mongolia) was a third force. According to the results of the war, fascism has ceased to participate in the global confrontation, and the USSR acquired his block and became the main force that fought with the West (at the head of which the United States also got up) for world domination.

Question 02. Determine the meaning of the term "Cold War". What reasons was it caused? What do you think, why are the historians of modernity finding themselves with their unequivocal definition?

Answer. The term "Cold War" means military hostility of states, but without battlements directly between the armies of these states. The "Cold War" between the United States and the USSR has many reasons, researchers doubt which of them recognize defining. I will venture to assume that the main is the following:

1) a pre-war rivalry of three ideological systems after the war turned into rivalry of two, but so different that the world was difficult between them, even if someone wanted it;

2) Personal hostility to the opposite ideology of political leaders - the "Cold War" began with Fulton Speech W. Churchill (hated Bolsheviks since their coming to power in Russia) and extremely sharp reaction to N. I.V. Stalin (despite the fact that W. Churchill had no post in the Great Britain);

3) The desire of subsequent leaders to continue the "Cold War" - to M.S. Gorbachev from the leaders of both superpowers only G.M. Malenkov expressed her termination, but this party figure lost the struggle for power;

4) The war was "cold" due to the presence of nuclear weapons who made fighting directly between the troops superpowed too destructive as for the defeated, so for the winner.

Question 04. What are local conflicts? Why were they dangerous for international security? Justify your answer.

Answer. Local call conflict with a minor number of direct participants and the territory of hostilities. During the "Cold War", over the back of the opposing parties almost always stood superpowers. The greatest danger was the exacerbation of relations between superpasses, as well as the participation of their military specialists in hostilities (the death of the latter could provoke interventions into the conflict of the superpower itself, which brought the threat of the global war. The second danger was then not realized, but became relevant now: a significant part of extremists, especially Islamic fundamentalists today, are personnel prepared during local conflicts of one of the superpower (the most famous example - Usama Ben Laden).

Question 05. Why did the Caribbean crisis ended with the Nuclear War between the USSR and the United States? What lessons for themselves removed the governments of two superpowers?

Answer. Both superpowers understood that the direct military clash between them could be the end for both of them, as well as for modern human civilization as a whole (not in gift A. Einstein said: "I don't know what will fight in the third world, but in the fourth will fight sticks in the fourth and stones "). It was after the Caribbean crisis that even thoughts about the nuclear war became clearly understood.

The main foreign policy objectives of this period were: stabilization of relations with European states (continued policies of peaceful coexistence), eliminating the threat of the collapse of the socialist camp, support and promoting a socialist device in the third world countries.

The most important strategic task was to strengthen the shaking positions of the USSR in the socialist camp and among the "Third World" compatures. In relations with Socialist countries of Eastern Europe, the Soviet leadership focused on providing several greater economic and political freedom. The main emphasis was made to strengthen economic cooperation (for example, energy supply) and political consultations in the framework of the work of the SEA (Council of Economic Compass), which contributed to an increase in economic and political independence. In 1968, the Government of Dubchek in Czechoslovakia, trying to reduce the dependence on the USSR and overcome the economic crisis, began broad democratic transformations. The answer was the input of the Warsaw Agreement (Soviet, German, Polish and Bulgarian) and military suppression of the Czech social movement. In Romania, the government under the leadership of N. Ceausescu was trying to conduct an independent foreign policy.

The relationship with China was aggravated. In 1969, armed clashes occurred in the Soviet-Chinese border in the area of \u200b\u200bthe Daman Island (in the Far East) and Semipalatinsk (Central Asia), when more than a thousand people died. Relations with leading European countries (France, England) have improved.

1972 was the time of rotation in Soviet-American relations. In the same year, during the visit of American President Nixon to Moscow, an agreement was signed to reduce strategically?; Arms (ASS-1), established restrictions on the creation of missile defense and intercontinental missiles. The introduction of Soviet troops in Afghanistan in December 1979. To support the communist movement, a new round of the "Cold War" was caused. In 1979, NATO decides to accommodate American medium-range American missiles in Western Europe. In the early 80s. Practically ceased contacts with Western countries.

Ticket number 25/1.

Political parties in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century: Classification, Programs (State Device, Agrarian, Worker and National Questions)

In the socio-political movement in Russia began the beginning of the XX century. Various forces participated, in different ways of the country's further development of the country. Three political camps were determined: Government headed by K. P. Victoronesev and V. K. Plevie (inviolability, preservation of autocracy), liberal (against unlimited arbitrariness, but also against revolutionary methods of struggle, for conducting reforms, granting political freedoms, expansion The rights of zeal, etc.) and the revolutionary (for violent overthrow of autocracy, radical transformations). The first to create their own organizations revolutionary forces. The core of their activities was based on socialist ideas (at the beginning of the century, Marxism was widely spread in Russia, especially among the intelligentsia, students, etc.), which were understood and interpreted in different ways. "Legal Marxists" (P. B. Struve, M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky, N. A. Berdyaev, etc.) developed the idea of \u200b\u200bthe gradual, evolutionary development of society and the natural change of public system. Russian Marxists (G. V. Plekhanov, V. I. Lenin, P. B. Axelrod, V. I. Zasulich, L. Martov, A. N. Preszov, etc.) shared the ideas of K. Marx on the historical mission of the working class , violent to unsuitable the existing system through the socialist revolution. Radically customized Social Democrats convened the congress of their organizations to try to unite them in the party (Minsk, 1898). Its creation was completed on the II Congress of the RSDLP (London, 1903) during fierce discussions (economists, "soft" and "solid" sparks, etc.). The congress adopted the Charter and the Party program, which consisted of two parts: Minimum program (the overthrowing of the autocracy, the establishment of the Democratic Republic, the improvement of the situation, the decision of the agricultural and national issues, etc.) and the Maximum Program (Socialist Revolution and the establishment of the proletariat dictatorship) . Proponents of Lenin - Bolsheviks won the majority of discussion issues. From the people's clubs in 1902, a batch of socialist revolutionaries (ECOV) arose, who defended the interests of the labor people - the peasantry, proletariat, students of young people, etc. Their program provided for the organization of society in the community-socialist basis, the "socialization" of the Earth. Ways to achieve goals - revolution and revolutionary dictatorship, tactics - individual terror. Leaders - V. M. Chernov et al. In the years of the revolution, after the release of Manifesto on October 17, liberal parties were taken shape. In October 1905 The Constitutional Democratic Party (Cadets), or the Film Freedom Party. Her program, which proceeded from the ideas of Western European liberalism, included the provisions on the introduction of a constitution in the country, guaranteeing the main democratic rights and freedoms, giving parliament (State Duma) legislative functions, transferring community land to peasants to property, etc. Cadets assumed through a peaceful, parliamentary struggle. Leaders - P. N. Milyukov, P. B. Struve, G. E. Lvov, V. I. Vernadsky, etc. In 1906, the Party of Okabristov was organized ("Union October 17"), which includes representatives of industrial and Financial bourgeoisie and landowners. Her program was aimed at establishing a strong power in the country, which enjoy the support of the people: the preservation of the "unified and indivisible Russia", the adoption of a democratic constitution, etc. The basis of the economy Octobrists considered private property. The method of action is a dialogue with the authorities in the hope of transmitting part of the state management functions in their hands. Leaders - A. I. Guccov, D. N. Shipov, M. V. Rodzianko and others. Monarchical, "black-clear" parties arose in 1905. The largest of them - the "Union of the Russian People" (A. I. Dubrovin) and "Russian People's Union named after Mikhail Archangel" (V. M. Purishkevich). The ideological basis is the theory of official nationality ("Orthodoxy, autocravia and nationality"): the preservation of the autocratic form of the Board, the protection of the interests of Velikorsov, etc. In the struggle for the implementation of his program, the Blackssotes not only used the Duma Tribune, but also resorted to violent methods (Jewish pogroms, etc.). Thus, a multi-party system has developed in Russia, various political forces operated.

and Russia has become not only the triumph of the reunification of the Russian nation. It opens up a new era, meaning the inevitable geopolitical redistribution of the world. First of all, it concerns Europe. As the philologist and geopolitics Vadim Tszymbor noted, the world is not divided into various civilizations without a residue. Between civilizations, that is, among countries that do not doubt their civilizational affiliation, peoples are located, which fluctuate and cannot determine which civilizational association they should enter.
Now, after the Crimea, the fate of the "buffer" states was questionable. For them, two scenarios are possible. Or they persist in loose, neutral, federal confederative status. Or divided into zones related to different civilizations - to the one that forms Russia and the one that creates Euro-Atlantic. Such an opinion in the "Izvestia" political analyst and philosopher Boris Interheev.
Moreover, Europe geopolitical redistribution will not be limited. In the queue "buffer" countries of Central Asia - Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. And not only they.
The joining of the Crimea was, in fact, the positioning of Russia as one of the key centers of the multipolar world, which consists in our eyes. Crimean precedent changes the strength of attraction between these centers.
The president, Vladimir Putin, noted in his "Crimean" message that "We are grateful to all who, with understanding, approached our steps in the Crimea, grateful to the people of China, whose leadership viewed and considers the situation around Ukraine and the Crimea in its entire historical and political completeness, highly appreciate the restraint and objectivity of India. " In other words, the Crimea means the weakening of attraction along the Russia-West line, and its strengthening in the Asian direction.
The joining of the Crimea may change the geopolitical alignment and for Latin American countries. The Argentine President of Christina Fernandez de Kirchner has already condemned the Western's refusal to recognize the results of the referendum in the Crimea, and compared it with a referendum, which was held in 2013 on the Falkland Islands. Falkland, we recall, were the disputed territory for which Argentina and the United Kingdom claimed. In 1982, Britain defended his right to the islands with the help of troops, and in March last year, the residents of these territories were spoken for membership in the British kingdom. As Kirschner recalled, then the UN did not challenge the legality of this vote.
"Many large powers that focused on the people of Falkland the right to self-determination, now they do not want to do the same in relation to the Crimea. How can you call yourself guarantor of global stability if you do not apply to all the same standards? It turns out, Crimeans can not be expressed by their will, and in the residents of Falklands can be? There is no logic in the same way! "She said after meeting with the Pope Francis.
In short, Moscow began a very big game. "The risk is great, and the possible Kush seems to be considerable. Old world order completely ceases to function, the new will soon begin to form. Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the first in 1986, spoke about the need for a new world order, nothing happened. Vladimir Putin returns to a fork to try again, "Fedor Lukyanov said the chief editor of Russia in Global Politics magazine.
What is behind these changes, and what place in this new world can Russia occupy?

- Russia's accession to Russia finally stated that her policy would be an independent character, "Fedor Lukyanov believes. - In the sense that if the Russian Federation believes that some of its interests are so important that they require a mandatory defendant, it will not pay attention to the costs of relations with the West.
Until now, it was not. Russia tried quite actively to defend his interests, but always left the space for the fact that in English is called Damage Control ("Damage control", - "SP") - minimize damage, which causes Russian solutions to relations with Europe and the United States.
Now Russia is indicated by at least themes and goals that are not subject to negotiations, and do not contain space for a compromise.
This is a major change, because after the Cold War, there were no countries that would have raised the question so hard. China adheres to a similar line, but he is passive, and tries not to attack so much how much to defend. China, rather, does not allow anything to do America, but himself does not take offensive demonstrative steps.
The appearance of the Power, which is not afraid to challenge the United States - in the full sense of the term is a significant factor. True, what exactly will it be - not very understandable. The problem is that Russia does not offer himself as a systemic alternative - simply as an independent and strong power.
"SP": - Putin in his "Crimean" speech thanked China and India separately. What does it say about?
- If our relations with the West will deteriorate, and it comes to the economic and diplomatic war, Russia has no other direction, except to the east, and there is no other reference partner, except China. It carries with them very serious changes in geopolitical positioning.
Partly such changes were inevitable to Ukrainian events. Putin In the December Message, the Federal Assembly said that our priorities at the XXI century are Siberia, the Far East, and generally an Asian vector. But now the situation is complicated. We can be in a position when we have no choice but to rely on China, and China will be happy to support us - but naturally, not just like that.
China is interested in binding Russia to himself in such a way that after a number of years, when the situation of his sharp conflict with the United States may arise, Russia would not have the opportunity to take a neutral position. As a result, rapprochement with China gives us space now, but in the long run, it should be treated very carefully.
"SP": - Crimean precedent can affect Latin America's geopolitical benchmarks?
- Statement by Crimea Argentina is rather exotic. It is clear why President Kirchner did him - she really sees the parallels of the Crimean situation with a referendum on the Falkland Islands. But I do not think that her position may seriously affect the international alignment of forces. Argentina - the country is not the most significant, and the situation in it is not the stronger. Her support voice is nice to hear, but it is impossible to use.
"SP": - How will the situation in the "buffer" will now develop, how does Boris Interev, the zone of Eastern Europe call it, can they really divide it into the influence zones?
- In contrast to Boris Interneev, skeptically treating the idea of \u200b\u200bthe existence of civilizational faults. I, at a minimum, do not really understand what kind of civilization offers Russia. In my opinion, the Russian Federation offers the project purely instrumental - the Customs Union. And in terms of civilization we do not offer anything that is fundamentally different from the Western civilization. Russia was and, most likely, there will be a country of European culture and history - albeit with its specificity.
As for the security situation - yes, in the context of the conflict, Russia-West "buffer" countries have to be very hard. We see what an attempt to make Ukraine decide on the development benchmarks. It is clear, the Ukrainian crisis has matured for a long time, but the immediate reason for him was an attempt to push Ukraine to decisive, the last choice between the Russian Federation and the EU.
I think something like this can happen to Moldova - now she will have to sign an agreement on association with the EU. But there, thank God, the situation is easier, in Moldova there is already a clear section - Transnistria - and in the case of an internal conflict, the Country of Miro will be divided by this line. True, for Chisinau, the entry into the EU is a great problem, since Moldova may be in Europe not as a separate country, but as the province of Romania.
In general, all "buffer" countries are now a difficult situation. I think they all would be interested in the joint project of Russia-Europe to control this space. But, unfortunately, for them, not the slightest aspiration - neither Russia, or especially the EU - discuss this kind of configuration.
"SP": - What will happen to the south-east of Ukraine? In his message, Putin said that we do not want the section of Ukraine. But, on the other hand, he stressed that "we are against the Military Alliance, and NATO remains with all the internal processes by the military organization, we are against the military organization to host near our fence, next to our house or our historical territories " Meanwhile, Kiev requested NATO's assistance in ensuring the security of Ukraine, the NATO Rapid Trident 2014 will take place under Lviv, in which Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Canada, Georgia, Germany, Moldova, Poland, Romania, United Kingdom and Ukraine will take part. Does this mean that the de facto border of NATO shifts to the east, and the alliance begins to "manage near our fence"?
- It is about the fact that Ukraine should be the most free confederation, something like Swiss cantons, plus to have the status of a neutral state.
Now Ukraine is preparing to sign a political unit of the Association Agreement with the EU. But this, by and large, does not mean anything - the European Union is not engaged in military cooperation. Such signing, rather, the symbol that Europe will not throw Ukraine.
As for NATO, from the point of view of the alliance, it is necessary to be crazy to sign some arrangements with the current Ukraine - a small-conditioned country, whose protection commitment is obviously impossible. So, I think about the close cooperation of Ukraine-NATO, so far can not be a speech, and the threat of such cooperation, rather, the inertial factor of bargaining between Russia and the West.
I think, after a while, the backup attempts of the European Union and Russia will begin to understand what can actually be done with Ukraine - the country that has become a suitcase without a handle ...
"The main geopolitical problem after the joining of the Crimea is still lies in Ukraine," the political scientist Anatoly El-Murid is sure. - The current autumn in the "unhappy" may develop the hardest economic situation. Apparently, the sowing new Kiev authorities spit on the industry - too. But they are going to increase gas tariffs - 1.4 times for industrial enterprises, and 2 times - for the population. Ukrainians will simply massively escape from the country, and we do not need this completely.
Russia remains literally a month or another to do something with the eastern regions of Ukraine. We need to create a buffer between the Russian Federation and Nazi Ukraine, and then this buffer can be used as Ukrainian Benghazi (an alternative center, which at one time created Western countries in Libya). And this Ukrainian Benghazi will be released the rest of the territory of the south-east of Ukraine.
"SP": - that is, military intervention from Russia is excluded?
- We can not interfere in Ukrainian affairs directly, Russia is really not needed by Russia. Moreover, it is impossible to assume the situation in which Ukrainians would sit in the south-east and waited for someone to come to them and release them. If the Ukrainians themselves allowed such a mess in their country, they are with this mess and understand.
Another thing is that the inhabitants of East Ukraine are now obvious - they cannot create resistance structures themselves. The reason is understandable: these are ordinary, normal people who have fallen into an abnormal situation. They have no theoretical training, nor organizational, no resources. With all of these, they need to help.
If the resistance structures in the southeast are created, in the coming month or two Kiev will not be able to oppose anything to them - as he could not in the Crimea. It is necessary that these forces take control of how in the Crimea, the authorities, the police, perhaps the army, and tried to free Kiev. Only after that you can negotiate with Western Ukraine on the Confederation or the division of the country.
If Russia succeeds in solving the problem of the eastern regions of Ukraine, it will be a new major geopolitical victory. If we put the situation on Samotek, - we will get a humanitarian catastrophe in Ukraine, as a result of which the Kiev government will be able to contact NATO with a request to control the entire territory of the "uncless" under control.
This process is to establish Russia's control over neighboring territories - can go further into other countries of the post-Soviet space. But only under the condition that it will be possible to solve the problem of mainland Ukraine - without this, we do not pull new acquisitions.
Andrey Polunin

The history of the Ukrainian SSR in ten volumes. Tom the ninth team of authors

1. New alignment of forces in the international arena. Fighting the USSR for the fair post-war device of the world

1. New alignment of forces in the international arena. Fighting the USSR for the fair post-war device of the world

The most destructive of all wars experienced by humanity - the Second World War, which covered more than four fifths of the world's population, had a huge impact on the fate of dozens of countries and hundreds of millions of people of different states. That is why the victorious completion of this war and the liberation of mankind from the threat of fascist enslavement, in which the Soviet Union played a decisive role, caused a sense of deep gratitude to the Soviet people for their great liberation mission, unprecedented heroism and dedication.

In the defeat of the German fascism and the Japanese militarism, the peoples of other countries contributed. With the heroic struggle of the Soviet people, partisan actions and folk uprisings were merged in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and Romania, the liberation struggle of the peoples of Yugoslavia and Albania, the resistance movement in France, Italy and other countries. The countries of the Anti-Hitler Coalition - the United States and England - also contributed to the defeat of fascism and militarism. However, the heroism and courage of Soviet people played a decisive role in the victorious conclusion of the war. Of 13 million 600 thousand killed, wounded and captured Nazis 10 million Wehrmacht lost to the Soviet - German front.

With its unparalleled heroism, Soviet people saved world civilization and many countries from the catastrophe.

In this regard, it is impossible not to recall that in the days of the victorious completion of the Second World War, no one could deny the decisive role of the USSR in this war. Even the English Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who had never had sympathies to the Soviet Union, was forced to recognize in February 1945 that the victories of the Red Army "won the limitless admiration for its allies and decided the fate of German militarism. Future generations will consider themselves indebted to the Red Army as unconditionally, as we have witnessed to be witnesses of these magnificent feats. " The recognitions of other heads of the anti-Hitler coalition states were similar.

The victory surrounded by the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War was the second, after the Great October, an epochable event of the World History, which had a huge revolutionary impact on all further world development. In mortal fighting with imperialism, socialism as a social system has shown high vitality and proved its indisputable superiority over capitalism.

Meeting with Soviet people - warriors and workers, feeling their humanism, deep internationalism and unlimited devotion to the ideas of peace and socialism, the working people of other countries penetrated with sympathies to the country of socialism and to socialism as a social system. It was this moral victory of the Soviet Union that was the main result of the Second World War, who made an irrevocable process of increasing its international authority. If the USSR has had diplomatic relations with 26 states to the Great Patriotic War, then at the end of the war - with 52 countries. None of any significant event in world history could continue to be resolved without the participation of the Soviet Union.

The most important political consequences of World War II. The victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War, the liberation mission of the Red Army, the full defeat of fascist Germany and Militarist Japan was irrevocably undermined by the forces of the global imperialist reaction. In such conditions, the revolutionary situation began in the countries of Central and Southeastern Europe. The ruling bourgeois tip of these countries betrayed the national interests of peoples, becoming a servant of fascist aggressors, and among the broad masses there was a sharp field. Communist and working parties managed to correctly appreciate and take into account the favorable domestic and external factors, led the struggle of the workers and all workers to the masses for social and national liberation and led them along the path of people's democratic and socialist revolutions. As a result of these revolutions from the capitalism system in Europe, Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia disappeared in Europe in the mid-40s. The defeat of German fascism allowed the German Communists to lead the workers of the eastern part of the country, liberated by the Red Army, on a democratic development path and in 1949 to form the German Democratic Republic. Communist Parties As the most devoted and consecutive defenders of the national and social interests of the masses managed to rally workers and all the progressive forces of their countries into uniform folk fronts and, relying on them, already in the first post-war years spent deep revolutionary - democratic transformations. During these transformations, the old state apparatus was broken and replaced by a new, people's democratic, the financial and industrial monopolies belonging to the Nazis and their accomplices were organized by large enterprises, banks, transport, agricultural reforms were carried out.

Depending on the specific alignment of class and political forces, historical traditions and other factors, all these revolutionary transformations in each of the countries had their own specific features and features, but their main and main content confirmed the general patterns of transition from capitalism to socialism.

The revolutionary - democratic reorganization was held in a fierce struggle with the overthrown forces of the old building supported by international imperialism. The faithful to its international debt, the Soviet Union provided all-possible fraternal assistance and support for young people's democratic states, strictly adhering to the principles of non-interference in their internal affairs. By the end of the 40s, a number of European countries - Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and the German Democratic Republic were on the path of construction of socialism.

In the course of the defeat of the Japanese militarism and the expulsion of the Japanese invaders, people unfolded, democratic revolutions in Vietnam and Korea. In the Asian continent, along with the Mongolian People's Republic, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Korean People's Democratic Republic were formed, and soon ended, however, of imperialist aggression. The defeat of the Red Army together with the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Army of the Quantong Army and the liberation of Manchuria from the Japanese invaders created favorable conditions for the deployment of the revolutionary struggle in China, which ended in the formation in 1949 by the People's Republic of China.

Thus, by the end of the 40s, along with the USSR and the MNR, in Europe and Asia, another 11 new people's democratic states have formed, which have been on the path of construction of socialism. A group of states with a population of more than 700 million disappeared from the capitalist system. Socialism has become a global system that has become the most influential power of world development. Capitalism turned out to be powerless to prevent this process.

The education of the global system of socialism was the main political investigation of World War II.

Another important consequence of the victory of the Soviet Union was huge positive shifts that occurred in the global communist and working movement. During the war, the communist parties of capitalist countries headed the struggle against fascism, for freedom and national independence, for democracy and social progress, which immeasurably raised their authority in the masses, strengthened communication with them. Despite the huge sacrifices incurred in the fight against fascism, the number of communists on the entire planet in 1945 compared with 1939 increased 5 times and amounted to 20 million people. Only in Western European countries in 1946 compared with pre-war times the number of communists increased from 1.7 million to 5 million people.

They achieved the exit from the underground and launched the legal activities of the Communist Party, Italy, France, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Japan, Cuba, Colombia and other countries.

Parliamentary elections 1945-1946. Showed the increased authority of the Communists in many countries. More than 5 million votes received in the elections to the Constituent Assembly of the Communists of France, the fifth of the voters gave votes for the Communists in Italy.

In 13 capitalist countries (France, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Austria, Finland, Norway, Irania, Luxembourg, Chile, Cuba, Iran, Indonesia) in the first postwar years the Communists became part of coalition governments.

In some of them, they managed to hold a number of democratic transformations. The workers of a number of capitalist countries by the active political struggle under the leadership of the Communists achieved important social reforms, the nationalization of some industries. The masses occurred as a whole, political activity, the role and organization of the working class in national and international scales increased.

In September - October 1945, representatives of 67 million workers organized in trade unions from 56 countries created the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFP) - the progressive organization of the world trade union movement, which was an important organizing force in the struggle for the democratic rights of workers, their urgent vital interests. A number of other international democratic organizations are being created: the World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDM) (October - November 1945, London), International Democratic Foundation for Women (MDFG) (December 1945, Paris), united the efforts of young men, girls, women in the struggle For democratic rights and freedoms.

An important act in the cohesion of the Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe in the total anti-imperialist and democratic platform was to create in September 1947 in Warsaw at a meeting of representatives of the Communist Party of Nine countries (USSR, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Italy and France) The information bureau of communist parties with its printed organ - newspaper "For a durable world, for folk democracy." The creation of these and other international organizations and bodies contributed to the intensification of the struggle for the work of peace and socialism, the exchange of experience of the Communist and the collective development of the strategy and tactics of the world communist movement, the establishment of the unity of the working class and all democratic forces in international and national scales.

The third important political consequence of World War II was the intensification of the national liberation movement, which led to the decay of the colonial system of imperialism. Turning into the first post-war years primarily in the countries of Southeast Asia, the Middle and Middle East, the national liberation movement soon covered other regions. Already in the 40s, except for China, Vietnam and North Korea, national independence won the peoples of Syria, Lebanon, India, Burma, Ceylon, Indonesia and other countries. The prophetic words of V. I. Lenin about the inevitable awakening of the colonial peoples of the East, followed by the "period of the participation of all the peoples of the East in solving the fate of the whole world so as not to be only an object of enrichment."

National - the liberation movement merged with the revolutionary struggle of the working class and became an increasingly important part of the global revolutionary process. Young independent states have been actively involved in world politics, playing a progressive role in international life. Of particular importance in this respect was the proclaimed by the Government of India, headed by Javaharlal Nehru, the non-almedulation policy, which had an anti-imperialist orientation. The second prophetic foresight of V. I. Lenin that "in the coming decisive battles of the world revolution, the movement of the majority of the world's population, originally aimed at national liberation, will turn against capitalism and imperialism and, maybe a much greater revolutionary role will play than we expect". These Leninist thoughts have fully confirmed the further development of the world revolutionary process.

Cardinal changes occurred in the very camp of imperialism. Until World War II, six imperialist powers - the United States, England, France, Germany, Japan, Italy - occupied the dominant position in the world and represented the main power of global imperialism. During the war, the last three were defeated and relegated to rank secondary states. England and France were also weakened in military, economic and politically and were dependent on the United States. So, the public debt of England during the war years increased by more than 3 times, and the volume of goods exported it decreased by more than 3 times. The role of French capital in the world market was reduced to a minimum. The share of France in the export of capitalist countries in 1945 was less than 1%.

Of the six main imperialist powers, only the United States came out of the war rapidly. No bomb fell into the territory of this state, and the net profit of American monopolies in the military industry for 5 years amounted to 117 billion dollars.

The American military monopolies in the war of war martial monopolis during the war of war and in peacetime did not want to reduce their production, pushed the country on the path of arms racing, aggressive military adventur. With a temporary monopoly on atomic weapons, the United States was put into the course of the so-called atomic diplomacy, designed to blackmail and intimidating other countries and peoples, fell on the way to create military bases along the borders of the USSR and the countries of the People's Democracy, the pinning of aggressive blocks and the unrestrained desire for world domination.

At the end of the war, the ruling imperialist circles of the United States took a course for a deliberate and conscious breakdown of general agreements from the USSR and the unleashing of American and Soviet conflicts. According to one of the US military leaders, General A. Arnold, expressed in the spring of 1945, the United States began to consider Russia with their main enemy and therefore believed that they needed bases around the world, located so that any object of the USSR could be attacked. The Government of Truman, who came to replace the government of Roosevelt, began to conduct these ideas into life and occupied a frankly anti-Soviet course. On August 6 and 9, 1945, without any military necessity, a nuclear bombardment of Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was committed, the main goal of which, on recognizing the Secretary of State Burns, was to "make Russia more agreed in Europe." Proclaimed by the English Prime Minister of Churchill on March 5, 1946 in Fulton in the presence of Truman, a speech made by open attacks against the Soviet Union, served essentially the beginning of a pinning of the Anglo-American Military Political Block, directed against the USSR in other forces of the world, democracy and Socialism, the beginning of the policy of the Cold War against them.

Under these conditions, the Soviet Union, based on the friendship and support of the countries of the People's Democracy and other young independent states, conducted a policy of a fair post-war device of the world, the elimination of new foci of war, peaceful coexistence and mutually beneficial international cooperation with all countries.

Fighting the USSR for the fair post-war device of the world. Back in World War II, the Soviet Union took concrete measures to prevent wars by creating an effective international organization for this purpose. In the very active participation of the USSR, in October 1943 at the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers of the USSR, the United States and England, the first practical steps to create such an organization were carried out. The declaration jointly adopted at this conference not only emphasized the importance of cooperation between these powers to ensure the defeat of fascist aggressors, but also recognized "the need for institution in a short term of the Universal International Organization to maintain international peace and security, whose members can be all such states - large and Small. " Thus, the principle of sovereign equality of states was proclaimed regardless of their social system in defending and preserving peace.

The Tehran Conference of the leaders of the three powers, held at the end of November - early December 1943, confirmed the intentions of these states to "work together both during the war and in the subsequent peacetime" and thus approved the idea of \u200b\u200bcreating an international organization to maintain post-war peace and security Peoples. At the conference in Dumbarton - Ox (near Washington) in August - October 1944 and the Yalta Conference of the leaders of the Three Allied Powers in February 1945, thanks to the persistent position of the USSR representatives, the basic fundamental questions on the creation of an international organization called United Nations were positively resolved. In particular, the achievement of the principal agreement of the leaders of the three Allied powers - the USSR, USA and England - at the Conference in the Crimea on the inclusion of the Ukrainian and Belarusian SSR among the founders of the UN as a sign of recognition of the outstanding contribution of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples in victory over common The enemy is the German fascism.

Opened on April 25, 1945, the Conference in San Francisco adopted the UN Charter, signed by the 51 state - the founder of this organization, including the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR, as well as Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, China, and others. Relying on supporting these and Other Democratic States, using the UN and other diplomatic pathways, the Soviet Union strongly sought the establishment of a truly fair post-war device of the world. Strictly following the previously accepted agreed solutions on the Yalta, Potsdam and other conferences, the USSR attached the primary importance to the fair placement of political forces in Europe, where the first and second world wars were unleashed over three decades. In this, as in other matters, the Soviet Union had to overcome the fierce resistance of the imperialist forces and their desire for all means to prevent the democratic development of a number of European countries.

D. Z. Manuilsky on behalf of the Ukrainian SSR signs the UN Charter, June 1945

The acute struggle of the two opposite political courses: the USSR and the People's Democratic States - on the one hand, the Western states on the other hand, turned around the conclusion of peace treaties with the former allies of fascist Germany - Italy, Romania, Hungary, Finland and Bulgaria. In accordance with the decision of the Potsdam Conference of the Three Powers, the preparation of peace treaties was entrusted by a body specially created for this purpose - the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs (Smid) of States that signed the conditions for the capitulation with these countries.

For those held from September 1945 until the end of 1946 in London, Moscow, Paris and New York, the sessions of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, as well as at the Paris Peace Conference (July - October 1946), the Soviet Union decidedly and persistently defended the interests of people - Democratic states of Europe, defended them from the attempts of Western states to interfere with their internal affairs, has steadily carried out a course to ensure lasting peace in Europe, seeking to maintain cooperation based on the principles of peaceful coexistence with States participating in the anti-Hitler coalition. This struggle made a worthy contribution and Ukrainian SSR as one of the founders of the UN. "

Members of the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR in the meeting room of the Paris Peace Conference 1946: the first row (from left to right) N. N. Petrovsky, V. A. Tarasenko, A. K. Kasimenko

At numerous meetings of the Smid, held with the aim of developing projects of peace treaties with the former allies of Germany, was clearly discovered by the desire of representatives of the United States and England to use the preparation of peace treaties for interference in the internal affairs of Bulgaria, Romania and other countries that were on the democratic path of development to restore them Former capitalist regimes. At the first meetings, the US delegation made slanderous attacks on the democratic governments of Bulgaria and Romania and refused to discuss civil contracts with these countries, until governments were created in them, "which can be recognized as". Having met the decisive rebuff of the USSR and other democratic forces, representatives of the United States and England in the future tried to impose the requirements if not replacement, the reorganization of governments in these countries, insisted on the creation of some "inspection commissions" or "European International Court", allegedly for Observing the implementation of the conditions of peace treaties, put forward other insolvent requirements and claims.

The main struggle of two opposing courses flashed on July 29, 1946 of the Parisian peace conference, convened for consideration and adoption of peace treaties with Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Italy and Finland, that is, solutions on the merits related to the fate of the world in Europe. Along with the delegations of the USSR and the BSSR, the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR led by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, a prominent state and politician D. Z. Manuel, actively participated in this conference. These delegations persistently achieved that the conclusion of peace treaties with Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Italy and Finland contributed to the democratic development of these countries in accordance with the will of their peoples, would forever eradicate the possibility of reviving Nazi ideology and orders and solved all the controversial territorial issues such The long-term and durable world in Europe strengthened. They strongly condemned the desire of Western states to impose such territorial decisions to the Eastern European states that would revive the atmosphere of conflicts and tensions in the area.

In a number of speeches at the conference, D. Z. Manuilsky and other members of the Ukrainian delegation, based on historical facts, revealed all the inconsistency of claims of the then reactionary Greek government to a significant part of the Bulgarian and Albanian territories. "According to what right, D. Z. Manuelsky said," the Greek delegation places claims to the original Bulgarian land, where the 300 thousand population accounts for only 150-200 people of Greek nationality. " If we talk about the change in Bulgarian - the Greek border, the only true, stressed the head of the Delegation of the Ukrainian SSR, would be the return of Bulgaria Western Thrace with access to the Aegean Sea, who was illegally rejected from her in 1919 on the next peace treaty. Thanks to the firm position of Soviet delegations and representatives of a number of other democratic states, territorial claims of Greece to Bulgaria and Albania were rejected. In the telegram in the name of D. Z. Manuel on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Soviet Ukraine, the Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the NRB Tov. V. Kolarov handed the heart greetings to the Ukrainian people and expressed a hot desire to continue to be strengthened by the fraternal friendship of the peoples of both countries, so brightly manifested in the Parisian peace conference, "where, - as he stressed, - representatives of Ukraine so decisively and brilliantly defended the Fair Bulgarian case People. "

The acute struggle at the Parisian peace conference broke out and by definition of Italo - Yugoslav border. The Soviet Union defended the requirement of Yugoslavia to correct the injustice admitted after the First World War and return the entire Yuliyansky Cartoon, with the city of Trieste, freed from the fascist invaders of the Yugoslav People's Liberation Army. Western states insisted in the section of this territory between Italy and Yugoslavia. The Ukrainian delegation firmly defended the interests of Yugoslavia. At this time, numerous telegrams and letters from the population of various settlements and regions of the Yulia Extreme (Montphalcoma, Panzanor, Arisa, etc.) came to the NamsR government and other (Monfalcomm, Panzanor, Arisa, etc.) with requests to support their homeland - Yugoslavia to unite their homeland. "Such heroic people, like Ukrainian, who in the struggle against fascism stood so much," they wrote, "not to understand the struggle that our people lead today, who wants to recognize our right to belong to Yugoslavia."

Performing the will of his people, the delegates of the Ukrainian SSR strongly defended the legitimate requirements of the Slavic population of the Yulia Eltitory. Speaking at the conference on this issue, D. Z. Manuilsky angrily condemned the position of Western states who had sought the dismemberment of the Yulia extreme, and supported the compromise proposal of the Yugoslav delegation to establish a free port of Trieste with a small territory.

Equally strongly defended the Delegation of the Ukrainian SSR together with other Soviet and People's Democratic delegations. Fair provisions of peace treaties on reparations and other economic issues. Thanks to this joint activity of democratic forces, headed by the Soviet Union, it was possible to conclude in general fair peace agreements with the former allies of Germany. For the first time in history, the situation arose when the Great Country - the winner persistently sought fair decisions towards defeated countries, guided by humane feelings and concern about the peaceful future of Europe.

All participants in the Paris Peace Conference, including the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR, on February 10, 1947, concluded peace treaties in Paris with Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland, which became valid from September 15, 1947, after ratifying them on August 29 1947 by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which spread the effect of this act to the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR. In signed peace treaties with these countries, separate unfair territorial decisions of the Versailles system were corrected, in particular the new borders of the USSR, taking into account the national interests of the respective states. These treaties did not infer the political and economic independence and the national dignity of the defeated states, did not interfere with their peaceful development. The important political regulations contained in them on the complete and final elimination of fascism in these countries, to ensure human rights and major democratic freedoms for all their citizens, etc. discovered new opportunities for further progressive development and strengthening the international positions of these countries.

Together with the Delegation of the USSR and other Sudenay countries, the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR conducted considerable work at the Danube Conference of 1948, where the issue of nursing rights on the river was considered. The fair decision of the Danube problem was important political and economic importance for all the invented countries.

Imperialistic forces led by the United States by all means to preserve the unfair regime of shipping regulations established by the Tunaway, according to which the United States, England and France, without the present countries, would carry out control over the river and used it for interference in internal affairs Surchase countries. Still at the Parisian peace conference when discussing the Hungarian issue D. Z. Manuilsky, resolutely exposing these plans for the United States and England, said that for small in-school countries, such a regime would be equivalent to suicide, for he would mean that "the hosts on the Danube would not Sudenay countries, and those who live on the Hudson and Thames. "

The head of the Ukrainian delegation at the Danube Conference A. M. Baranovsky together with the Delegates of the USSR and other Dongsky countries firmly stated that their states would not allow any dictatorship and interference from the outside in addressing the issues of navigation on the river. Speaking by a single front, the Dongyan countries dropped the outdated convention of 1921, which allowed the imperialist countries - the United States, England and France - to actually control the shipping on the Danube, and adopted a new, renewed by the sovereign rights of the countries adjacent to him on the river shipping regime. This convention, together with other Divano countries, signed the Delegation of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR.

One of the central in the postwar years was also the question of the fair democratic solution to the German problem. Performing the will of peace-loving peoples, recorded in the decisions of the Potsdam Conference, the Soviet Union strongly sought the eradication of fascism in Germany and creating conditions for the country's development as a single democratic peace-loving state. The entire public of Ukraine is hotly supported this policy of the Soviet Union, requiring full destruction of fascism and all conditions for his revival. "The fascist plague will threaten humanity as long as the flame writer is warningly in the days of the Nuremberg process - the internationalist Yaroslav Galan," the focus of fascism is not eliminated, all to the latter. "

At the same time, Soviet people have never been guided by a sense of revenge. They sought conclusions with Germany a fair peace treaty, turning it into a single peace-loving state. However, the Western powers refused their allied obligations and took the course to split Germany and the revival of militarism in it, creating a separate state in September 1949 by the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). In such conditions, the democratic forces of East Germany on October 7, 1949 were proclaimed the creation of the German Democratic Republic, which became the path of construction of socialism. The family of socialist states grew and fastened.

The formation of new, socialist international relations and participation in the Ukrainian SSR. The defeat of fascism and militarism in the Second World War and the implementation of the Great Liberation Mission of the Red Army, which created favorable conditions for the victory of people's democratic and socialist revolutions in a number of Europe and Asia, also discovered ample opportunities for establishing and developing completely new international relations of countries and peoples, based on the Lenin Principles of Socialist Internationalism.

Already from the first days of the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the young Soviet state in the mouth of his leader V. I. Lenin proclaimed the basic principles of its foreign policy aspiration for peace and friendship with all nations and achieving the voluntary and honest union of nations based on their complete mutual confidence. This course of the Soviet government conducted consistently and steadily at all stages of development of our state. But the conditions of the capitalist environment and the policy of imperialist ruling circles slowed down and limited the possibilities of its implementation. The victory of people's democratic revolutions in a number of countries in Europe and Asia created new, favorable conditions for implementing the Lenin principles of relations between countries and peoples.

The establishment and development of qualitatively new international relations between countries that have become on the path of construction of socialism is the most important component and one of the patterns of forming a global socialist community as a new social phenomenon of world history.

During the Great Patriotic War and in the first post-war years, the CPSU and the Soviet government took a number of steps to lay a solid foundation for new relationships with young people's democratic states. Considering that from the first days of their most important life task was to overcome foreign policy isolation, as well as strengthening sovereignty and international positions, the Soviet Union was the first of the great powers without any prerequisites established diplomatic relations with new democratic governments of Poland (January 4, 1945), Yugoslavia (April 11, 1945), Romania (August 6, 1945), Bulgaria (August 14, 1945), Hungary (September 25, 1945), Albania (November 10, 1945). This act was an important political support for young people's democratic states. He also discovered new opportunities for the expansion of trade and economic relations and was accompanied by the provision of the necessary economic, technical and other assistance. In 1945, the USSR concluded the first trade agreements with Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and other countries, which launched a new foreign economic relations with them.

The signing of contracts for friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance between the USSR and other people's democratic countries, as well as between them, was particularly important. The first contracts for friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance were concluded by the Soviet Union during the war: with Czechoslovakia December 12, 1943, Yugoslavia on April 11, 1945 and Poland on April 21, 1945

A number of trade agreements have been signed with other states, and later - contracts for friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance: with Romania -4 February 1948, Hungary - February 18, 1948, Bulgaria - March 18, 1948, as well as an agreement with Albania April 10, 1949 in 1947-1949. And between the European countries of the People's Democracy themselves, contracts for friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance were signed. By the end of the 40s, they concluded 35 different bilateral allied agreements among themselves. Thus, a whole system of contractual relations between the USSR and these countries legally entrusted with the new relationships of socialism countries and played an important role in the protection of the conquests of socialism and in its successful development were created. The most important feature of these treaties was to conclude them on a fundamentally different basis than existing agreements between capitalist countries. Characteristic features of new agreements were full equality of the parties, mutual respect for independence and sovereignty, fraternal mutual assistance and cooperation. They envisaged close military - political cooperation and mutual assistance in the protection of the conquests of socialism, the joint struggle against the repetition of aggression from Germany and Japan or states united with them. The main goal of contracts is a fraternal mutual assistance in the construction of socialism through the development of comprehensive cooperation in the economic, political, cultural and other fields.

The Ukrainian SSR, directly bordering a number of European People's Democratic States, has taken the most active part in the establishment and development of friendly relations with them, and in particular in solving on a good-known basis of all border and other issues.

So, in the spirit of complete mutual understanding and sincere friendship, questions were resolved about the mutual exchange of the population between Soviet Ukraine and Poland. After the liberation of Poland from the fascist occupation, many Ukrainians, Belarusians and Lithuanians living in its territory, and Poles living in the USSR began to express the desire to relocate to their homeland. In accordance with imprisoned on September 9, 1944, in Lublin by agreement between the governments of the Ukrainian SSR and Poland, granted the right of voluntary mutual relocation of citizens, from October 1944 to August 1946, 482,880 people left the territory of Poland, and from the territory of Ukraine Poland - 810415 people.

Thus, about 1 million 300 thousand people of Ukrainian and Polish nationalities were able to take advantage of the right to return to their homeland and join the creative work of their people for the construction of a new life. Such a fair solution to the issue was only possible after the establishment of national power in Poland and on the basis of new relations between two neighboring countries.

A similar solution was made by the Ukrainian SSR and Czechoslovakia. After the liberation in October 1944, the Transcarpathian Ukraine in the villages and the cities of Transcarpathia launched a nationwide movement for reuniting with Soviet Ukraine. In accordance with the will of the Transcarpathian population, on June 29, 1945, the Soviet - Czechoslovak Agreement on the exit of the Transcarpathian Ukraine from Czechoslovakia and the reunification of it from his homeland - the Ukrainian SSR. This act completed the reunification of all Ukrainian lands in the Unified Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Going towards the request of the Government of Czechoslovakia, on July 10, 1946. The Soviet government signed an agreement on which the option was given to the option of Czechoslovak citizenship and relocation to Czechoslovakia to the Soviet citizens of the Czech and Slovak nationalities living on the territory of the former Volyn province and the right of the option of Soviet citizenship and relocation in the USSR Czechoslovak citizens of Ukrainian, Russian and Belarusian nationalities.

In accordance with this agreement, 33,077 people moved to Czechoslovakia to Czechoslovakia, and 8556 people from Czechoslovakia in the USSR. Both sides did everything necessary for this humane action to be organized, with strict compliance with the principles of voluntariness and in the spirit of sincere friendship and good neighborliness. Similarly, on a voluntary basis and, in accordance with the principles of new fraternal relations, other issues related to the mutual refund of various material and cultural values \u200b\u200bof Soviet Ukraine and their neighboring people and democratic states - Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania were resolved.

The workers of the Ukrainian SSR followed all the processes of revolutionary transformations in fraternal neighboring countries, generously shared their experience in the construction of a new life, provided them with all-time help and support. Mutual exchanges of parliamentary and government delegations were particularly important, as well as delegations of industrialists, cultural and public figures, etc.

Already in 1946-1947 In Ukraine, deputies of the National Assembly of the Czechoslovak Republic and the People's Assembly of Bulgaria, who acquainted with the experience of the highest state bodies of the Ukrainian SSR. The strengthening of fraternal friendship and cooperation was also promoted by staying during these years in Ukraine by the heads of Poland and Czechoslovakia, as well as a visit to Ukraine in 1948 by the Governmental delegation of Hungary.

In order to study the experience of collective farm construction, Polish, Czechoslovak, Bulgarian, Romanian peasants and specialists of agriculture came repeatedly arrived in the Ukrainian SSR. Only during February - July 1949, three delegations of Polish peasants were visited in the republic with a total number of about 600 people. They visited a large number of collective farms, state farms, MTS, industrial enterprises and scientific institutions of Kiev, Cherkasy, Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, Dnepropetrovsk, Vinnitsa, Zhytira, Chernihiv and other areas, where they acquainted in detail with the organization of production, life and life of agricultural workers. In June - July of the same year, in Kiev, Kharkov, Poltava and Kirovograd regions, he was acquainted with the experience of agricultural production by the delegation of peasants of the Romanian People's Republic, and in November - in five regions of Ukraine studied the experience of workers of the fields delegation of the peasants of Czechoslovakia. In turn, Ukrainian masters of agricultural production F. I. Dubkovetsky, E. S. Khobta, M. X. Savchenko et al. Leated into fraternal countries, where they shared their experiences and innovative achievements.

Despite the great difficulties and deprivations associated with huge losses and destruction during the war, the Soviet Union, faithful to its international politics, provided very substantial assistance to young people's democratic states in the restoration and development of the economy and in implementing all processes to create a new society. The Ukrainian SSR also added a decent contribution to this fraternal assistance.

So, in January 1945, immediately after the liberation of the capital of Poland, the government of the Ukrainian SSR transferred a significant amount of products to the starving residents of Warsaw, sent specialists and techniques to revive the destroyed city.

The authoritative commission of Soviet experts arrived in the capital of Poland. The USSR sent 500 national residential buildings to the fraternal country, 500 cars, a large number of various building materials and equipment, factories and factories. From the ruins and ash rose a new Warsaw. And in her revival, many sons of Ukraine took part. "The history of mankind does not know this fact of heartily responsiveness and disinterested friendship," said the mayor of Warsaw, which is manifested by the Soviet people against the fraternal Polish people. Pasha Brothers - Ukrainians, Belarusians, Lithuanians who themselves suffered so much from Hitler's barbarians, the first to give us a hand to us to heal the wounds applied to us by Hitler's executions as soon as possible. "

Similar fraternal assistance to the working people of Ukraine provided the peoples of Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and other countries. Converacted in 1945, the first trade agreements with Bulgaria and Hungary, the Soviet Union immediately began to supply the necessary goods, materials, fuel, raw materials, machinery and equipment. Only for seven months of this year, 30 thousand tons of ferrous and non-ferrous metals were imported into Bulgaria, about 10 thousand tons of petroleum products, about 10 thousand tons of cotton, more than 20 thousand agricultural machines and many other equipment and materials. As the newspaper "Worker" wrote then, it was "crucial to rescue our national economy from a catastrophe threatening." The special role was played for Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Hungary, the supply of Soviet goods, raw materials and materials into arid 1946-1947, when the population of these countries experienced serious difficulties associated with crumbling. Since 1948, the USSR began to import cars and equipment there, which contributed to successful construction in these countries of the material and technical base of socialism.

The systematic assistance of the USSR was important for young people's democratic countries in the training of specialist personnel, which began to be carried out since 1946, as well as other forms of scientific and scientific and technical cooperation, the exchange of experience in cultural construction, in which Ukraine was actively involved .

Thus, in the second half of the 40s, thanks to the wise internationalist policy of the CPSU and the Soviet state, new, socialist international relations are developing, in which not only government agencies are actively involved, but also broad masses of workers. The formation of new, socialist international relations is the inegenial and most important component of the process of the formation and development of the global socialist system. The comprehensive cooperation of the USSR with people's democratic states grew and developed as socialist transformations, restoration and further development of the national economy, the emergence of new industries and new processes in public life.

The achieved successes in the development of national economy of the People's Democratic States in the 40s and the accumulated experience of bilateral relations and cooperation dictated them the need and expediency of the transition to multilateral cooperation. In January 1949, the economic meeting of representatives of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia was held in Moscow, which discussed the issue of organizing wider economic cooperation on a multilateral basis between them. The meeting decided to establish a common economic body - the Council of Economic Communication - on the principles of the equal representation of the countries participating in it. The main objectives of the CMEV proclaimed the exchange of economic experience, providing each other technical assistance, mutual assistance with raw materials, materials, machines, equipment, etc.

At the same time, the SEA was declared an open organization in which other countries that share its principles and those who want to cooperate with the states belonging to it can also come.

At the country's own experience, which became the path of construction of socialism, was convinced that cohesion, unity of actions, cooperation and mutual assistance multiplies their forces, increase the effectiveness of foreign policy shares of each of them and contribute to the growth of their economic and political power, their joint impact on the global revolutionary process.

In the struggle for international cooperation and social progress of peoples. As the international authority of the USSR and the strengthening of the national authorities in a number of Europe and Asia are growing in the post-war years, on the one hand, and the weakening of the positions of imperialism in the world as a whole - on the other, the US imperialist circles and other Western states have increasing the course of the so-called " Cold War "against the USSR and young people's democratic states. This course is most clearly manifested itself in the notorious "doctrine Truman" and "Marshall Plan", proclaimed by the official circles of the United States in 1947.

The "Doctrine Truman", set forth in the President of the US President Congress on March 12, 1947, provided for the provision of "assistance" of $ 400 million and Turkey allegedly to protect them from "aggression", declared the struggle against communism as a line of state policy of the United States. A frank goal was put forward - to oppose revolutionary changes in the world, maintain reactionary regimes, military dictatorships as bastions of anti-communism, to narrow military blocks around the USSR and young people's democratic states.

The second program of "dollar diplomacy", outlined on June 5, 1947. US Secretary

Viktor Suvorov against all the crisis in the USSR and the struggle for power in the leadership of the country in the first post-war decade. The first book of the trilogy "Chronicle of the Great Decade", prequel the bestseller "Kuzkina Mother" Tatiana Studdy and Unprecedented Cruel Marshal Zhukov not