The Cold War has been a constant threat of nuclear holocaust for many years. The confrontation between the USA and the USSR led to armed conflicts around the globe. The end of the Cold War reduced tensions, but the danger of a unipolar world emerged.

Features of the Cold War

The confrontation between the USSR and the USA was expressed in the following signs:

• acute international struggle between the socialist and capitalist systems;
• the creation of military-political blocs;
• arms race;
• periodic sharp international conflicts;
• the division of the whole world into zones of influence and interference in the affairs of independent states;
• total “psychological” war with the aim of maximum discrediting the enemy, mass “war psychosis”.

Rice. 1. An American soldier with an arrested Vietnamese. 1965

During the Cold War, the “image of the enemy” was actively introduced: the USA was considered in the USSR a country “with an animal grin” and an army of “bandits and murderers”; The West, in response, announced a crusade against the "Evil Empire".

General overview of the Cold War

Briefly about the results of the Cold War gives an idea of ​​the table:

Table "Main stages of the Cold War":

Events	the date	essence	Result
Berlin Crisis		Allied unification of occupation zones in Germany, blockade of West Berlin by the Soviet Union	The division of Germany into the FRG and the GDR
War in Korea		Confrontation between the pro-Soviet North and the pro-Western South	Division of Korea along the 38th parallel
Caribbean crisis		An attempt by the USSR to place nuclear missiles in Cuba, a real threat of the outbreak of World War III	Peaceful settlement of the conflict
Vietnam War		The confrontation between North and South Vietnam, the open participation of the US armed forces	The victory of the North and the formation of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
Afghan war		The entry of Soviet armed forces into Afghanistan in order to support the pro-communist regime
The collapse of the USSR		The collapse of the world socialist system	End of the Cold War

The USSR and the USA lost more than they won in the Cold War. The main results were human casualties and huge expenditures on armaments).

Rice. 2. The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. 1988

Lessons from the Cold War

All these events show that there were no and could not be winners and losers in the Cold War.
Briefly on the points from the confrontation between the USSR and the USA, it follows:

• armed conflicts are not the only solution to international problems;
• nuclear weapons can lead to the death of all mankind;
• personal qualities of state leaders (Khrushchev, Kennedy, Reagan, Gorbachev) are of great importance;
• military power is not the main reason for victory;
• military propaganda and agitation are causing enormous damage to the whole world.
• the forcible introduction of Soviet socialism or American democracy is equally dangerous.

Rice. 3. N. Khrushchev and J. Kennedy in the negotiations.

The confrontation between the two superpowers, in which their allies also participated, was not a war in the truest sense of the term, the main weapon here was ideology. For the first time, the expression "" was used in his article "You and the Atomic" by the famous British writer George Orwell. In it, he accurately described the confrontation between invincible superpowers that possess atomic weapons, but agreed not to use them, remaining in a state of peace, which, in fact, is not peace.

Post-war prerequisites for the start of the Cold War

After the end of the Second World War, the allied states - members of the Anti-Hitler coalition faced the global question of the upcoming struggle for peace. The United States and Great Britain, concerned about the military power of the USSR, not wanting to lose their leadership positions in global politics, began to perceive the Soviet Union as a future potential adversary. Even before the signing of the official act of surrender of Germany in April 1945, the British government began to develop plans for a possible war with the USSR. In his memoirs, Winston Churchill justified this by saying that at that time Soviet Russia, inspired by a hard and long-awaited victory, had become a deadly threat to the entire free world.

The USSR was well aware that the former Western allies were planning a new aggression. The European part of the Soviet Union was exhausted and destroyed, all resources were involved in the restoration of cities. A possible new war could become even more protracted and require even greater expenses, which the USSR would hardly have coped with, unlike the less affected West. But the country could not show its vulnerability in any way.

Therefore, the authorities of the Soviet Union invested huge funds not only in the reconstruction of the country, but also in the maintenance and development of the communist parties in the West, seeking to expand the influence of socialism. In addition, the Soviet authorities put forward a number of territorial demands, which further intensified the confrontation between the USSR, the USA and Great Britain.

Fulton speech

In March 1946, Churchill, speaking at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, USA, gave a speech that in the USSR came to be considered a signal to start. In his speech, Churchill explicitly called on all Western states to unite for the coming fight against the communist threat. It is worth noting the fact that at that time Churchill was not the Prime Minister of England and acted as a private person, but his speech clearly outlined the new foreign policy of the West. It is historically believed that it was Churchill's Fulton speech that gave impetus to the formal beginning of the Cold War - a long confrontation between the USA and the USSR.

Truman Doctrine

A year later, in 1947, US President Harry Truman, in his statement known as the Truman Doctrine, finally formulated the US foreign policy objectives. The Truman Doctrine marked the transition from post-war cooperation between the US and the USSR to open rivalry, which was called in a statement by the American president a conflict of interests between democracy and totalitarianism.

Introduction. 2

1. Causes of the Cold War. 3

2. "Cold War": beginning, development. 6

2.1 Beginning of the Cold War.. 6

2.2 Climax of the Cold War.. 8

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

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

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

Conclusion. 17

Literature. nineteen

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

At present, in connection with the deployment of the US anti-missile system and the negative attitude of representatives of a number of countries, including Russia, to this, since the missiles will be located near Russian borders, this topic is becoming especially acute.

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

1. Causes of the Cold War

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

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

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

What were the causes of the Cold War?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. "Cold War": the beginning, development

2.1 Start of the Cold War

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.2 Climax of the Cold War

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. Consequences, results and lessons of the Cold War

3.1 Political, economic and ideological consequences of the Cold War

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the event of the creation of a system of collective security in Europe, the Warsaw Pact was to lose its force from the date of entry into force of the all-European treaty.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is, in my opinion, the fear of total annihilation, which has sobered up politicians, reoriented public opinion, and made us remember eternal moral values.

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

So who won this war?

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

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

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

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

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

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

This circumstance is also noted by many foreign politicians.

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

12., Tyazhelnikova of Soviet history. / Ed. . - M.: Higher school, 1999. - 414 p.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

cold war

Start of the Cold War

Installation upon completion World War II Soviet control over countries of Eastern Europe, especially the creation pro-Soviet government in Poland a counterweight Polish government in exile in London, led to the fact that the ruling circles Great Britain and the United States began to perceive the USSR as a threat.

In April 1945 G. Prime Minister of Great Britain Winston Churchill ordered the preparation of a plan of war against the USSR. The assignment was preceded by conclusions that Churchill presented in his memoirs:

First of all, Soviet Russia became a deadly threat to the free world; Secondly, immediately create a new front against its rapid advance; third, this front in Europe should go as far east as possible; fourthly, the main and true goal of the Anglo-American armies is Berlin; fifth, the liberation of Czechoslovakia and the entry of American troops into Prague is of the utmost importance; At sixth, Vienna, essentially the whole of Austria, should be ruled by the Western Powers, at least on an equal footing with the Russian Soviets; seventh, the marshal's aggressive pretensions must be curbed Tito regarding Italy...

Operation plan was prepared by the Joint Planning Staff of the British War Cabinet. The plan gives an assessment of the situation, formulates the goals of the operation, defines the forces involved, the directions of attacks by the troops of the Western allies and their probable results.

The planners came to two main conclusions:

starting a war with the USSR, it is necessary to be prepared for a long and costly total war,

the numerical superiority of Soviet troops on land makes it extremely doubtful whether limited and rapid (military) success can be achieved. ( )

It should be pointed out that Churchill indicated in the comments on the draft plan presented to him that it was a "precautionary measure" for what he hoped was a "purely hypothetical case" .

In 1945, the USSR made territorial claims Turkey and demanded a change in the status of the Black Sea straits, including recognition of the right of the USSR to establish a naval base in Dardanelles.

In 1946, the Greek rebels, led by the communists and fueled by the supply of weapons from Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria where the communists were already in power. At the London meeting of foreign ministers, the USSR demanded that it be given the right to protectorate over Tripolitania (Libya) to secure a presence in the Mediterranean.

In France and Italy the communist parties became the largest political parties and the communists entered governments. After the withdrawal of the bulk of American troops from Europe, the USSR became the dominant military force in continental Europe. Everything favored the establishment of Stalin's complete control over Europe, if he wished it.

Part of the politicians of the West began to advocate the appeasement of the USSR. This position was most clearly expressed by the US Secretary of Commerce Henry Wallace. He considered the claims of the USSR justified and offered to go to a kind of division of the world, recognizing the USSR's right to dominate in a number of regions of Europe and Asia. Churchill took a different view.

The formal start of the Cold War is often considered 5th of March 1946 , when Winston Churchill(at that time no longer holding the post of Prime Minister of Great Britain) made his famous speech in Fulton (USA-Missouri), in which he put forward the idea of ​​creating a military alliance of the Anglo-Saxon countries in order to fight world communism. In fact, the aggravation of relations between the allies began earlier, but by March 1946 it intensified due to the refusal of the USSR to withdraw occupation troops from Iran(troops were withdrawn only in May 1946 under pressure from Great Britain and the USA). Churchill's speech outlined the new reality that the retired British leader, after assurances of deep respect and admiration for "the valiant Russian people and my wartime comrade Marshal Stalin" defined as follows:

… From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, iron curtain stretched across the continent. On the other side of the imaginary line are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. (…) The communist parties, which were very small in all the eastern states of Europe, seized power everywhere and gained unlimited totalitarian control. Police governments predominate almost everywhere, and so far, apart from Czechoslovakia, there is no true democracy anywhere.

Turkey and Persia are also deeply alarmed and concerned about the demands that the Muscovite government is making of them. The Russians made an attempt in Berlin to create a quasi-communist party in their zone of occupation of Germany (...) If the Soviet government now tries to separately create a pro-communist Germany in its zone, this will cause serious new difficulties in the British and American zones and will divide the defeated Germans between the Soviets and the Western democracies.

(…) The facts are as follows: this, of course, is not the liberated Europe for which we fought. This is not what is needed for permanent peace.

Churchill urged not to repeat the mistakes of the 30s and consistently uphold the values ​​of freedom, democracy and "Christian civilization" against totalitarianism, for which it is necessary to ensure close unity and rallying of the Anglo-Saxon nations.

A week later, I. V. Stalin, in an interview with Pravda, put Churchill on a par with Hitler and stated that in his speech he called on the West to war with the USSR.

1946-1953

On March 12, 1947, US President Harry Truman announced his intention to provide Greece and Turkey with military and economic assistance in the amount of $400 million. At the same time, he formulated the objectives of US policy aimed at helping "free peoples who resist attempts at enslavement by an armed minority and external pressure." Truman in this statement, in addition, defined the content of the beginning rivalry between the US and the USSR as a conflict between democracy and totalitarianism. This is how the Truman Doctrine was born, which became the beginning of the transition from post-war cooperation between the USSR and the USA to rivalry.

In 1947, at the insistence of the USSR, the socialist countries refused to participate in the Marshall Plan, according to which the United States provided economic assistance to countries affected by the war.

The efforts of the USSR, in particular Soviet intelligence, were aimed at eliminating the US monopoly on the possession of nuclear weapons (see the article Creating the Soviet atomic bomb). On August 29, 1949, the first nuclear bomb tests were carried out in the Soviet Union at the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site. American scientists from the Manhattan Project had previously warned that the USSR would eventually develop its own nuclear capability - nevertheless, this nuclear explosion had a stunning effect on US military strategic planning - mainly because US military strategists did not expect that they have to lose their monopoly so soon. At that time, it was not yet known about the successes of Soviet intelligence, which managed to penetrate Los Alamos.

In 1948, the United States adopted the "Vandenberg Resolution" - the official refusal of the United States from the practice of non-alignment with military-political blocs outside the borders of the Western Hemisphere in peacetime.

Already on April 4, 1949, NATO was created, and in October 1954 the FRG was admitted to the Western European Union and NATO. This step caused a negative reaction from the USSR. In response, the USSR set about creating a military bloc that would unite the Eastern European countries.

The end of the 40s - in the USSR, repressions against dissidents begin, in the USA - a "witch hunt".

Although the USSR now also had a nuclear capability, the United States was far ahead in terms of both the number of charges and the number of bombers. In any conflict, the United States would easily be able to bomb the USSR, while the USSR could hardly retaliate.

The transition to the large-scale use of jet fighter-interceptors somewhat changed this situation in favor of the USSR, reducing the potential effectiveness of American bomber aircraft. In 1949, Curtis LeMay, the new commander of the US Strategic Air Command, signed a program to completely switch bomber aircraft to jet propulsion. In the early 1950s, the B-47 and B-52 bombers began to enter service.

The most acute period of confrontation between the two blocs (the USSR and the USA with their allies) fell on the years of the Korean War.

Manifestations of the Cold War

Acute political and ideological confrontation between the communist and Western liberal systems, which engulfed almost the entire world;

creation of a military system ( NATO, Warsaw Pact Organization, SEATO, CENTO, ANZUS, ANZUK) and economic ( EEC,CMEA, ASEAN etc.) unions;

creation of an extensive network military bases USA and USSR on the territory of foreign states;

forcing arms race and military preparations;

a sharp increase in military spending;

intermittent international crises ( Berlin Crises, Caribbean crisis, Korean War, Vietnam War,Afghan war);

the tacit division of the world into “spheres of influence” of the Soviet and Western blocs, within which the possibility of intervention was tacitly allowed in order to maintain a regime that was pleasing to one or another bloc ( Soviet intervention in Hungary, Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia, American operation in Guatemala,US and UK orchestrated overthrow of anti-Western government in Iran, US-sponsored invasion of Cuba, American intervention in the Dominican Republic,American intervention in Grenada)

the rise of the national liberation movement in colonial and dependent countries and territories (partly inspired by the USSR), decolonization these countries, the formation "third world", Non-Aligned Movement, neocolonialism;

maintaining a massive psychological warfare”, the purpose of which was to promote their own ideology and way of life, as well as to discredit the official ideology and way of life of the opposite bloc in the eyes of the population of “enemy” countries and the “third world”. For this purpose, radio stations were created that broadcast to the territory of the countries of the “ideological enemy” (see articles Enemy voices and foreign broadcasting), the release of ideologically directed literature and periodicals in foreign languages ​​was financed, the injection of class, racial, national contradictions was actively used. First Main Directorate of the KGB of the USSR carried out the so-called active events"- operations to influence foreign public opinion and the policy of foreign states in the interests of the USSR.

support for anti-government forces abroad - the USSR and its allies supported financially communist parties and some others left parties in Western and developing countries, and national liberation movements, including terrorist organizations. Also, the USSR and its allies supported peace movement in Western countries. http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A5%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0 %BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0 - cite_note-12. In turn, the US and British intelligence agencies supported and took advantage of such anti-Soviet organizations like People's Labor Union. The United States has also secretly provided material assistance since 1982 Solidarity in Poland, as well as provided material assistance Afghan Mujahideen and " Contras" in Nicaragua.

reduction of economic and humanitarian ties between states with different socio-political systems.

boycotts of some Olympic Games. For example, the United States and a number of other countries have boycotted summer olympic games 1980 in Moscow. In response, the USSR and most of the socialist countries boycotted Summer Olympics 1984 In Los Angeles.

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

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

Historians distinguish the following stages of the Cold War:

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

· 1953 - 1962 - During this period of the Cold War, the world was on the brink of nuclear conflict. Despite some improvement in relations between the Soviet Union and the United States during Khrushchev's "thaw", it was at this stage that the anti-communist uprising in Hungary, the events in the GDR and, earlier, in Poland, as well as the Suez crisis took place. International tension increased after the development and successful testing of the USSR in 1957 of an intercontinental ballistic missile.

However, the threat of nuclear war receded, as the Soviet Union now had the opportunity to retaliate against US cities. This period of relations between the superpowers ended with the Berlin and Caribbean crises of 1961 and 1962, respectively. It was possible to resolve the Caribbean crisis only during personal negotiations between the heads of state - Khrushchev and Kennedy. Also, as a result of the negotiations, a number of agreements on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons were signed.

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

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

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

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

Effects:

In fact, the Cold War had an impact on almost all aspects of human life, in addition, its consequences in different countries had their own characteristics. If we try to highlight some of the main, most general consequences of the Cold War, we should mention the following:

· division of the world according to ideological principle - with the beginning of the Cold War and the formation of military-political blocs. Led by the USA and the USSR, the whole world found itself in a state of division into "us" and "them". This created numerous practical difficulties, as it put many obstacles in the way of economic, cultural and other cooperation, but first of all it had negative psychological consequences - humanity did not feel like a single whole. In addition, the fear was constantly fanned that the confrontation could go into an acute phase and end in a world war with the use of nuclear weapons;

· the division of the world into spheres of influence and the struggle for them - in fact, the entire planet was considered by the opposing sides as a springboard in the fight against each other. Therefore, certain regions of the world were spheres of influence, for control over which there was a fierce struggle between the superpowers at the level of economic policy, propaganda, support for certain forces in individual countries and secret operations of special services. As a result, severe disagreements were provoked in various regions, which, after the end of the Cold War, led to numerous hotbeds of tension, the emergence of local armed conflicts and full-scale civil wars (the fate of Yugoslavia, “hot spots” on the territory of the former USSR, numerous conflicts in Africa, and so on) ;

· Militarization of the world economy - huge material resources, natural, technical and financial resources were directed to the military industry, to the arms race. In addition to the fact that this undermined the economic potential of many countries (primarily from the socialist camp), it also became a very serious factor in the subsequent emergence of local conflicts and global terrorism. After the end of the Cold War, a large number of weapons and weapons remained, which, through the black market, began to feed "hot spots" and organizations of extremists;

· the formation of a number of socialist regimes - the end of the Cold War marked the anti-communist and anti-socialist revolutions in many countries, primarily in Europe. However, a number of countries have retained socialist regimes, and in a rather conservative form. This is one of the factors of instability in modern international relations: for example, it is still very unprofitable for the United States to have a socialist state (Cuba) at its borders, and the DPRK, whose political regime is very close to Stalinism, is an irritant for the West, South Korea and Japan in view of information about the work on the creation of North Korean nuclear weapons;

The cold war was actually not so "cold" - the fact is that this confrontation was called the cold war because it did not come to an armed conflict between the superpowers and their most powerful allies. But meanwhile, full-scale military conflicts took place in a number of parts of the world, partly provoked by the actions of the superpowers, as well as with their direct participation in them (the war in Vietnam, the war in Afghanistan, a whole list of conflicts on the African continent);

· The Cold War contributed to the emergence of some countries in the leading positions - after the Second World War, the United States actively supported the economic revival and development of West Germany and Japan, which could be their allies in the fight against the USSR. The Soviet Union also provided some assistance to China. At the same time, China developed independently, but while the rest of the world focused on the confrontation between the USA and the USSR, China received favorable conditions for transformation;

Scientific, technical and technological development - the Cold War stimulated the development of both fundamental science and applied technologies, which were originally sponsored and developed for military purposes, and then were repurposed for civilian needs and influenced the growth of the standard of living of ordinary people. A classic example is the Internet, which originally appeared as a communication system for the US military in the event of a nuclear war with the USSR;

· the formation of a unipolar model of the world - the United States, which actually won the Cold War, became the only superpower. Relying on the NATO military-political mechanism created by them to counter the USSR, as well as on the most powerful military machine that also appeared during the arms race with the Soviet Union, the States received all the necessary mechanisms to protect their interests in any part of the world, regardless of the decisions of international organizations and interests of other countries. This was especially evident in the so-called "export of democracy" carried out by the United States since the turn of the 20th-21st centuries. On the one hand, this means the dominance of one country, on the other hand, it leads to an increase in contradictions and resistance to this domination.