After the collapse of the USSR, part of Eastern Europe began to be called “Central and Eastern”: Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Slovenia and the three Baltic countries. The group of countries of South-Eastern Europe began to include the states of the former Yugoslavia (Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro, except Slovenia), Albania, Bulgaria and Romania. Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova and Russia began to be called Eastern Europe.
After the fall of communist regimes in the CSEE countries in 1989, transformation processes began in them. In December 1992, Czechoslovakia was divided into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Democratic tendencies were asserting themselves in the CSEE countries. A difficult situation has developed in Yugoslavia.
Russia's influence in this part of the world has fallen, partly because the Russian Federation, after the collapse of the USSR, lost its border with the “former” EE. Countries in the region began to reorient economic ties to the West. In 1993 the European Community became European Union based on the Maastricht Treaty of 1993. The Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia, Malta and Cyprus joined the union on May 1, 2004. Bulgaria and Romania, which were not ready for the 2004 enlargement, gained membership on 1 January 2007.
Formation of the Visegrad Group and the Central European Initiative
The collapse of the Department of Internal Affairs led to the fact that its former members temporarily fell out of the same security system and therefore created the Visegrad Triangle. On February 12-15, 1991, in the ancient capital of Hungary, Visegrad, a declaration of cooperation between Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary was signed. At the meeting in Visegrad, agreements were reached on coordinating actions in the field of foreign policy and strengthening ties with European institutions, interaction in the areas of security, development of economic ties, cooperation in the field of human rights protection, environmental issues, energy and information exchange. In the second half of the 90s, cooperation within the Visegrad Group took on the character of annual meetings of prime ministers. At one of these meetings in Bratislava in May 1999, a decision was made to establish the International Visegrad Fund, the agreement on the creation of which was concluded on June 9, 2000 in Prague. The Dunajsko, founded in 1989, turned out to be a stable form of cooperation between the CEE countries and the Balkan region -Adriatic Community (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Hungary, Italy, Macedonia, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Albania, Bulgaria, Romania, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova). The objectives of the creation were to promote the pan-European process and the “blurring” of bloc boundaries. In July 1994 it became the Central European Initiative.
Beginning of the war in Yugoslavia
In the fall of 1991, the collapse began single state. Croatia and Slovenia declared independence on June 25, 1991, Macedonia on September 8, 1991, and Serbia on February 28, 1992. In April 1992, EU countries recognized the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The population of this republic consisted of Serbs, Croats and Muslims. Shortly after the declaration of independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bosnian Serbs, led by Radovan Karadzic, proclaimed the creation of the Republika Srpska in January 1992. In July 1992, the Bosnian Croats followed their example and created the state of Herzeg-Bosna. In the spring of 1992, chaotic clashes began throughout the country between Serbs, Croats and Muslims - a “war of all against all.” Serbs, Croats and Muslims practiced ethnic cleansing in areas inhabited by "hostile" ethnic groups. To investigate war crimes on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, by decision of the UN Security Council on May 25, 1993, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was created in The Hague.
Conflict in Bosnia and first NATO intervention in the Balkans (December 1995)
Surge of integration activity European countries contrasted with the situation in the Balkans. The situation was particularly difficult in Bosnia and Herzegovina. None of the UN projects for the division of Bosnia received the approval of the warring parties. The Clinton administration in 1993 came to the conclusion that it was necessary to use force against the Bosnian Serbs and their supporting Serbia. On February 28, 1994, the Alliance Air Force used weapons for the first time on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, and after that the scale of NATO intervention began to increase.
After suffering a series of military defeats, Serb forces in Bosnia agreed to negotiations. In November 1995, a meeting of the leaders of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina was held in Dayton (USA) with the participation of representatives of Russia, the USA and the EU. Bosnia and Herzegovina was turned into a confederation of two parts - the Republika Srpska and the Muslim-Croat Federation. On December 14, 1995, settlement agreements were signed in Paris between Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The principle of cohabitation between different ethnic groups that had coexisted in Bosnia and Herzegovina for centuries was destroyed. The country's capital, Sarajevo, became part of a zone of common Muslim-Croat administration. The Serbian population of the city abandoned it. Each of the two entities had the right to form its own army. Most of those accused by the International Tribunal turned out to be Serbs - including the leaders of the Bosnian Serbs R. Karadzic and R. Mladic, and subsequently the President of Serbia S. Milosevic himself.
Conflict in the Serbian province of Kosovo and the second NATO intervention in the Balkans
The signing of the Dayton Accords on Bosnia did not mark the final stage in the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia. At the end of the 90s, the conflict escalated in the Serbian region of Kosovo, whose population consisted of Albanians and Serbs with a numerical advantage of the former. The Albanian population of Kosovo did not submit to the Belgrade authorities, creating their own governance structures. The situation worsened when, in the spring of 1997, a crisis erupted in the Republic of Albania associated with the fall of the regime of Sali Berisha (which was supported by the United States). On the territory of Northern Albania, bases were created for militants of the Kosovo Liberation Army, who began to attack federal troops and Serbian police in Kosovo from here. Trying to maintain control over the situation, in February 1998 S. Milosevic decided to introduce additional army forces into Kosovo and military police. Clashes began between government troops and separatists, during which civilians, Serbs and Albanians, suffered.
On October 13, 1998, the NATO Council decided to begin bombing Serbia if it refused to accept the demands of the Security Council. Western countries proposed convening a conference of conflicting parties to work out a compromise. Serbia refused to sign the peace agreement, considering the demand included in the text to send foreign troops into Kosovo unacceptable, and on March 24, the NATO Air Force began systematic bombing of Serbia, including Belgrade. Yugoslavia became the target of a military attack by NATO, whose actions were not directly sanctioned by decisions of the Security Council. After two months of bombing, on June 9, 1999, Serbian representatives and NATO forces signed an agreement on a ceasefire and withdrawal government troops from Kosovo, in return for which a NATO contingent was brought into the region on June 3, 1999. Kosovo was actually torn away from Yugoslavia. NATO's actions in Kosovo were not sanctioned by the UN, but their results were approved by UN Security Council Resolution No. 1244 of June 10, 1999.
After the defeat in Kosovo, the situation in Yugoslavia became even more complicated. The election of S. Milosevic as President of Serbia caused protests and on October 6, 2000, he was removed from power. V. Kostunica was proclaimed president. His arrival made it possible to normalize relations between Yugoslavia and Western countries. S. Milosevic was extradited in June 2001 International Tribunal in The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity in connection with events in Kosovo. The change of power in Serbia did not stop the disintegration of the FRY. President Milo Djukanovic, who came to power in Montenegro back in May 1998, led the way towards peaceful separation from Serbia. In March 2002, through the mediation of the European Union, an agreement was signed on the transformation of Yugoslavia into the Federation of Serbia and Montenegro while maintaining them as part of a single state. But Montenegro continued to insist on complete separation from Serbia. The European Union preferred the preservation of Yugoslavia as a single state, since the EU missions in Kosovo acted on the basis of documents adopted in relation to Yugoslavia, and the disappearance of this state would formally call into question their legitimacy. Meanwhile, Kosovo, while nominally part of Serbia, was effectively administered by UN officials. Since February 4, 2003, in connection with the adoption of the new constitutional charter, the former Federal Republic Yugoslavia became officially known as Serbia and Montenegro.
NATO expansion
The collapse of the Warsaw Warsaw and the USSR prompted NATO to approve the Partnership for Peace program in January 1994 to promote cooperation between NATO, Central and Eastern European countries and states former USSR. Simultaneously with the approval of the program, Clinton officially outlined Washington's position on the issue of expansion to the east.
On May 27, 1997, the Founding Act of the mutual relations, cooperation and security between Russia and NATO. Having formally secured Russia's understanding, the alliance countries continued their course towards its expansion. Improving relations between NATO and Russia made it easier to resolve the issue of a new expansion of the alliance to the east March 12, 1999 + Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland. March 29, 2004 + Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia. April 1, 2009 + Croatia, Albania.
Organization of the Warsaw Pact (WTO), its role in the military-political confrontation between the two systems
Was created under the leadership Soviet Union in 1955. The Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance was signed on May 14, 1955 at the Warsaw Meeting of European States to Ensure Peace and Security in Europe by the leaders of Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, the German Democratic Republic, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia for a period of 30 years. In 1985, the Agreement was extended for another 20 years. According to the Treaty, the parties that signed it pledged to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force, and in the event of an armed attack on any of them, to provide immediate assistance to the attacked states by all means deemed necessary, including the use of armed forces .
The creation of the Department of Internal Affairs was the military-political response of the Soviet Union to the expansion of the NATO bloc to the east. In 1954, the West ratified the Paris Agreements of 1954, which provided for the formation of the Western European Union, carried out the remilitarization of West Germany and the inclusion of Germany in NATO. As a result, with the creation of the Department of Internal Affairs in Europe, a confrontation between two military blocs arose for three decades. The internal task of the Department of Internal Affairs was to maintain power in the countries of Central Europe in the hands of pro-Soviet communist regimes.
The political leadership of the Department of Internal Affairs was carried out by the Political Consultative Committee, which united the heads of state - members of the organization. Military leadership was exercised by the Joint Command of the Armed Forces, which, according to tradition, was headed by the Marshal of the Soviet Union. The first commander was the hero of the Great Patriotic War, Marshal I.S. Konev.
Within the framework of the Department of Internal Affairs, the Military Council of the United Armed Forces was also created. The presence of the Department of Internal Affairs provided a legal basis for the participation of Soviet troops in the suppression of the anti-communist uprising in Hungary in 1965. In 1968, military contingents of the participating countries of the Department of Internal Affairs took part in the events in Czechoslovakia, suppressing the “Prague Spring”. Also in 1968, participants in the Bucharest meeting of the Department of Internal Affairs, as well as the meeting of the PKK in Sofia, strongly condemned the US armed intervention in Vietnam.
Taking into account the fact that the total military potential of the European countries participating in the Warsaw Warsaw Forces was not comparable with the military potential of the USSR, the essence of the Warsaw Warsaw Warsaw Forces was the nuclear “umbrella” of the USSR over the European socialist countries and the ability of the Soviet Armed Forces to use the territory of the allies. The creation of the Department of Internal Affairs legitimized the deployment of Soviet troops in Central European countries. In the mid-80s. A group of Soviet troops of 380 thousand people was stationed in the GDR, in Poland - 40 thousand, in Czechoslovakia - 80 thousand, in Hungary - about 70 thousand SA servicemen. At the end of the 50s. preparations were being made for the opening of a naval base on the Adriatic Sea (Albania). Within the framework of the Warsaw Warsaw Warsaw, the USSR Ministry of Defense was given the opportunity to control the armed forces of the countries participating in the Warsaw Warsaw Warsaw Forces and to rearm them. The exchange of intelligence information was established. Within the framework of the Warsaw Pact, the troops of the Warsaw Pact countries were constantly rearmed, and officers were retrained as planned. A wide exchange of military experience was launched.
The most important part of the activities of the Department of Internal Affairs was the wide cooperation of intelligence services and various special forces, which constitute the main support of the ruling regimes in the countries participating in the organization.
In line with the USSR's diplomatic efforts to prevent a global nuclear conflict, the Department of Internal Affairs was positioned as a defensive bloc, whose activities were directed against possible aggression from NATO.
Large-scale exercises of joint groupings of troops were regularly held. The last of them, the most massive, took place in 1982 - “Shield-82”.
The Department of Internal Affairs was not without internal contradictions and problems. In 1961, due to political and ideological disagreements between Moscow and Tirana, Albania ceased its participation in the activities of the Department of Internal Affairs; in 1968, Albania formalized its withdrawal from the organization. In the 70-80s, Romania periodically demonstrated its special position in the activities of the Department of Internal Affairs. From time to time, leaks of military-technical information to NATO member countries were discovered in the activities of the allies.
Within the Department of Internal Affairs, decisions were not made by consensus. The organization was under the complete control of the Soviet leadership, in military terms - General Staff USSR Ministry of Defense. Within the framework of the Warsaw Warfare, a policy of bilateral multi-level complex military-political integration of the socialist countries of Central Europe with the USSR was pursued, establishing strict control over the armies of the countries allied to the Soviet Union. The effectiveness of this policy was demonstrated in 1981, when the armed forces of the Polish People's Republic actually performed police functions, relieving the ML from the need to intervene in the internal affairs of Poland, following the example of 1968 in Czechoslovakia.
After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the wave of “velvet” revolutions in Central European countries, the Warsaw Pact lost its ideological basis. The leadership of the USSR in the late 80s and early 90s. considered the Department of Internal Affairs a relic of the Cold War and an unnecessary burden. The rapid withdrawal of Soviet troops from Germany began, and then from other ATS countries. The liquidation of the organization turned out to be a formal fact. On July 1, 1991, the parties included in the OVD signed a Protocol on the termination of the Treaty. Countries that are former members of the Warsaw Internal Affairs Organization have undertaken an obligation not to declassify the Warsaw Internal Affairs archives, but have not fulfilled all of this obligation.
Abstract: Countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe: the formation of states people's democracy
Countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe
The formation of people's democracies
Formation of people's democratic governments
Controversies in the National Fronts between communist parties and their allies
Prospects for a peaceful transition to socialism
Formation of people's democratic governments. During the Second World War, National (Popular) Fronts were formed in all countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, in which workers, peasants, petty bourgeois, and, at the last stage in some countries, bourgeois, collaborated.
zhuaz parties. The unification of such heterogeneous social and political forces became possible in the name of
national goal - liberation from fascism, restoration of national independence and demo-
cratic freedoms. This goal was achieved as a result of the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allies by the Armed Forces of the USSR, the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition and the actions of the anti-fascist Resistance movement. In 1943-1945, in all countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, the
or the National Front governments, in which communists took part for the first time in history, reflecting their role in the fight against fascism.
In Albania and Yugoslavia, where the communists played the leading role in the people's liberation struggle and the National Fronts, they headed the new governments. In other countries, coalitions have been created
onny governments.
The cooperation of various parties within the National Fronts was explained by the difficulty of the tasks,
who appeared before the countries liberated from fascism. The new conditions required joining forces
all democratic parties and organizations. Need for expansion social base and recognition
Western powers that emerged during the liberation struggle of the governments of Yugoslavia and Poland determined the inclusion in their composition of representatives of emigration and those internal forces that did not accept
little participation in the National Fronts led by the communists.
The efforts of all governments were aimed at solving priority national problems: face-
vision of the consequences of the domination of occupation and local fascist regimes, revival destroyed-
new war and occupation of the economy, restoration of democracy. Created by the occupiers was destroyed
the state apparatus, government institutions in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania are cleared of fa-
fascist elements, the activities of fascist and reactionary parties, which were responsible
for national disasters, was banned. Democratic constitutions were restored, abolition
The activities of parties that were not members of the National Front were allowed. Along with the previous structures
New nationalities, born during the liberation struggle, began to act within the framework of state power.
onal committees, councils.
Of the social problems in all countries, with the exception of Bulgaria, where this problem was solved as a result
During the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, the first priority was the liquidation of large landowners
land ownership and allotment of land to peasants. Based on what was started in some countries even before full development
to promote agrarian reforms, the principle was laid: “ The land belongs to those who work it". Con-
confiscated from landowners and those who collaborated with the occupiers, the land was transferred for a small fee
ownership of the peasants, and partially passed to the state. In Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia
The lands of the Germans were confiscated and, by decision of the Allied powers, they were resettled on the territory of Germany.
mania. The programs of the National Fronts did not contain a direct demand for the liquidation of capitalist
any property, but provided for the confiscation of the property of the Nazis and their accomplices and punishment for
national betrayal, as a result of which enterprises belonging to German capital and that part of the bourgeoisie that collaborated with the Nazis came under state control.
Thus, as a result of the elimination of fascism and the restoration of national independence in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe in 1943-1945, a new system was established, which received
then the name of people's democracy. In the political sphere it characteristic feature there was a multi-party
ity, in which the activities of fascist and clearly reactionary parties were not allowed, but a significant
Communist and workers' parties played a role in governments and other authorities. Not in Romania
Only formally, as was the case in Hungary and Bulgaria, the institution of monarchy was preserved. In the field of economics
while maintaining private and cooperative enterprises, significantly greater than in the pre-war period,
The public sector began to play a role. The most serious changes took place in agriculture
ve, where the solution to the agrarian question began in the interests of the poor peasantry.
There have also been changes in the foreign policy orientation of the people's democracies. Still during
war with the Soviet Union, treaties of friendship, mutual assistance and post-war cooperation were signed
cooperation with Czechoslovakia (December 1943), Yugoslavia and Poland (April 1945). Above Bolga-
ria, Hungary and Romania, as former satellites Hitler's Germany, Soviet Union joint
but established control with the United States of America and Great Britain - the Union operated here
nal control commissions (CCC), in which, thanks to the presence of Soviet troops, representatives of the USSR had a stronger position than their Western partners.
Controversies in the National Fronts between communist parties and their allies. In Albania and Yugoslavia, communist parties occupied dominant positions in political life.
Numerous pre-war petty-bourgeois who resumed their activities after the liberation of the country
The large and peasant parties of Yugoslavia were unable to compete with the Communist Party
Yugoslavia (CPY) and organizations close to it. This was shown by the elections to the Constituent Assembly in
November 1945, in which the Popular Front won a landslide victory (90% of the vote). In Albania
candidates of the communist-led Democratic Front collected 97.7% of the vote. Another situation -
tion was in other countries: in Hungary for the first time post-war elections(November 1945) communists
ical forces, they ensured that the elections were postponed and took place only in January 1947.
The role of communists in government was more significant than can be judged on the basis of par-
parliamentary elections. The support of the Soviet Union created the most favorable opportunities for the Communist Parties.
in order to begin the gradual pushing back of their allies in the National Front from behind
positions they take in political life. Retaining, as a rule, the posts of ministers of internal affairs
affairs and exercising control over bodies state security, and in a number of countries – and over armed
With their help, the Communist Parties largely determined the policies of the people’s democratic governments.
telst, even if they did not have the majority of the portfolios.
On many issues that were resolved by the new government, contradictions arose between the communists and
other National Front parties. The bourgeois and petty-bourgeois parties believed that with the uprising
the restoration of national independence, the constitutional system, the punishment of war criminals and those who collaborated with the Nazis, the implementation of agrarian and some other reforms, the implementation of
announced in the programs of the National Fronts have been fully implemented. They advocated further
development of the states of Central and South-Eastern Europe along the path of bourgeois democracy with foreign
political orientation towards Western countries and maintaining friendly relations with the Soviet Union.
The Communist Parties, considering the establishment of a system of people's democracy as a stage on the way to the proclaimed
they considered the ultimate goal - the building of socialism - to continue and deepen what had been started
transformations. Using city and rural bourgeoisie, capital and entrepreneurial initiative
tive to solve the problems of reconstruction, the communists at the same time waged an ever-increasing offensive against
its political and economic positions.
Transfer into the hands of the state (nationalization) of the property of German capital and that part of the bourgeoisie
which collaborated with the Nazis, led to the formation in all countries of more or less powerful state-
public sector of the economy. Following this, the Communist parties began to seek the nationalization of the property of the national bourgeoisie. This was first implemented in Yugoslavia, where the
The 1946 constitution made it possible, if the public interest required it, to export private property. As a result, already at the end of 1946, a law was issued on the nationalization of all
private enterprises of national and republican significance. Private owners still have
only small industrial enterprises and craft workshops.
In Poland, when the National Bank was created, private banks, deprived of the opportunity to exchange their existing cash for new banknotes, were forced to cease to exist. By-
torture of private owners to achieve the return of enterprises seized by the occupiers and during the liberation
The efforts of the country that came under temporary government control were only partially successful. Entering-
joining the National Front, the Polish Peasant Party – Polskie Stronnitstvo Ludowe (PSL),
headed by the former prime minister of the emigration government S. Mikolajczyk, did not object to
socialization of key branches of production, but was against the idea that the main form of this generalization
The implementation was the transfer of enterprises to state ownership. She advocated for them to be taken
cooperatives and local governments into their own hands. But in January 1946, at the insistence of Poland,
Which workers' party (PPR) adopted the nationalization law, according to which nationalization took place
large and medium industry.
In Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania, which were under the control of the JCC, an attack on the positions of the bourgeoisie
was carried out by establishing state and workers' control over private enterprises, and not by nationalization.
Thus, practically already in 1945-1946, the Communist Parties managed to ensure that the pro-
the process of confiscating the property of the bourgeoisie and transferring it into the hands of the state. This meant going beyond the programs of the National Fronts, a transition from solving national problems to solving problems of social
nal character.
Relying on the Soviet troops remaining in most countries and the ordnance at their disposal,
security forces, communist parties managed to strike at the political positions of the bourgeoisie
national and petty-bourgeois parties, forced in a number of cases to go into opposition. On charges
Opposition supporters were arrested in conspiratorial activities. In Hungary at the beginning of 1947,
Such accusations were brought against a number of leaders of the Party of Small Farmers (SMAH), including
including against the head of government. Many of them, fearing arrest, were forced to flee abroad. In Bulgaria, N. Petkov, one of the leaders of the BZNS, was executed, and in Romania a number of national figures were put on trial.
Nal-Tsaranist (peasant) party. In Poland, in the elections to the Sejm in January 1947, led by
The communist bloc defeated the peasant party of S. Mikolajczyk. PSL protests over
numerous violations during election campaign and persecution of candidates of this pair-
these were rejected. Soon after this, the PSL, as an opposition political party, disappeared from the scene, and
Mikolajczyk was forced to flee abroad to avoid arrest.
Thus, by mid-1947, in many countries the communist parties were able to remove their allies on the right from the National Fronts and strengthen their own positions in the leadership of the state.
gift and economic life. Only in Czechoslovakia, where as a result of elections to the Legislative
meeting in May 1946, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia came out on top, and a precarious balance of power remained in the National
nom front. But even there the communists practically took decisive positions.
Prospects for a peaceful transition to socialism. In 1945-1946, leaders of a number of communist parties
stated that the political and socio-economic transformations carried out during the formation of
developments and development of the system of people's democracy are not yet socialist in nature, but create conditions for the transition to socialism in the future. They believed that this transition could be accomplished differently than
in the Soviet Union - without the dictatorship of the proletariat and civil war, peacefully. At the first congress
The PPR in December 1945 recognized that in the conditions of a people's democratic system, creating a
for the further struggle of the working class and working people for their complete social liberation,
there is an opportunity to move towards socialism evolutionarily, peacefully, without shocks, without the dictatorship of the proletariat -
ta. G. Dimitrov considered it possible“ on the basis of people's democracy and parliamentary regime, one day move to socialism without the dictatorship of the proletariat” . Leaders of other communist parties
also considered the people's democratic power as transitional, which will gradually develop into
socialist. Stalin did not object to such views, who in the summer of 1946, in a conversation with
K. Gottwald admitted that in the conditions that emerged after the Second World War, another path to
socialism, which does not necessarily include Soviet system and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
As can be seen, in the first years of the existence of people's democracy, the leaders of the Communist parties of the countries of the Center
and South-Eastern Europe, considering the Soviet system as a classic example of the transition to a
nationalism, allowed the possibility of another path, which would take into account national specifics and
the existence of cross-class alliances, which found expression in the National Fronts. This concept
tion was not fully developed; it was outlined only in the most general terms. It was suggested
that the transition to socialism will take a long period of time. Subsequent events did not justify
emerging expectations.
The countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe were able to free themselves from fascism in the final stages of World War II mainly thanks to the actions of the Red Army. By the time of the cessation of hostilities in Central and South-Eastern Europe there were industrialized, agro-industrial and backward states, the level of economic development of which remained uneven. For the Stalinist leadership of the USSR, the imperative was to create western borders countries of the “security belt” of friendly states - instead of the “cordon sanitaire” of anti-Soviet orientation that existed on the western borders of the USSR in the interwar era. At the Crimean and Potsdam conferences of the Big Three, J.V. Stalin raised the question of respect for Soviet interests in Central and Eastern Europe to the Western allies. During the war and immediately after it, Moscow provided primary support to the communist parties of Eastern European countries, but at the same time encouraged the creation of broad popular, national, domestic fronts anti-fascist orientation, which included various democratic parties and movements. But as the Cold War worsened, from about mid-1947, the Soviet leadership set a course for the formation of openly communist governments.
Since the liberation of Eastern European countries from fascism (1944-1945) and until 1947-1948. "People's democracy" regimes were established in these countries. In the second half of the 1940s. In the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, a painful process of mass relocation of people occurred, affecting primarily the eviction of 6 million Germans, whose property was nationalized. The governments of Eastern European countries, most of which represented broad multi-party coalitions, carried out serious agrarian reforms that led to the elimination of landlordism. Large industry and the banking system were nationalized, which undermined the social and political positions of the propertied classes. At first, the actions of the Eastern European regimes emphasized the “national path” to socialism. During the period of “people's democracy,” only Yugoslavia and Albania established one-party communist regimes led by Josin Broz Tito and Enver Hoxha, respectively.
As the international climate in Europe worsened, the Soviet Union began to more actively promote the “Sovietization” of regimes in Central and Eastern Europe. The position of communists in the power structures of these states was constantly strengthened, and a course was taken towards the virtual elimination from the political scene of Eastern and Central Europe of bourgeois parties that criticized radical socio-economic transformations of a socialist nature. In Poland in the first post-war years, the political confrontation between communists and pro-Western forces bore the features of a civil war. In 1947-1948 there was an intensification of the fight against political opposition, national and local elections in Eastern European countries have become increasingly formal. The process of uniting national communist and social democratic parties into single structures oriented towards Moscow and Marxist-Leninist ideology was initiated. Specialists and advisers from the USSR played a major role in all these internal political processes. In particular, they were behind the organization political processes, the victims of which were politicians representing bourgeois parties.
The media, which criticized the copying of Soviet orders, were closed, and many opposition politicians (F. Nagy in Hungary, S. Mikolajczyk in Poland) were forced to emigrate. By 1948-1949 truly opposition, anti-communist parties in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe ceased to exist. In Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and East Germany it was formally preserved multi-party system, but all allowed parties
and public organizations recognized the leading role of Marxist-Leninist parties within the framework of broad national fronts, the dominant positions in which belonged to the communists. It became finally possible to talk about the complete political domination of communists in Central and Eastern Europe after the government crisis in early 1948 in Czechoslovakia (“ February Revolution"), putting an end to the remnants political pluralism in Eastern European countries.
At the end of the 1940s. The countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe entered the phase of direct “socialist construction”; the formation of a “world socialist system” was taking place, completely oriented towards the Soviet model. In particular, this concerned the role of the ruling party and the cult of personality of national and party leaders - Wilhelm Pieck (GDR), Boleslav Bierut (Poland), Klement Gottwald (Czechoslovakia), Matthias Rakosi (Hungary), Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej (Romania), Josin Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Enver Hoxha (Albania). At the end of the 1940s. Against the backdrop of the aggravation of the Soviet-Yugoslav conflict, serious purges of the party apparatus from real and imaginary oppositionists took place in almost all Eastern European communist parties, and many prominent communists were executed.
The transition to the stage of “socialist revolutions” in socio-economic terms marked for the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe the deepening of radical transformations in the spirit of the dictatorship of the proletariat: a qualitative expansion of the public sector and nationalization of the economy, collectivization of agriculture, and a complete erosion of the economic positions of the bourgeoisie.
Foreign policy of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the second half of the 1940s. XX century became more and more dependent on Moscow. In the first post-war years, the USSR concluded treaties of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance with Eastern European countries, some of which included provisions for the presence of Soviet troops on the territory of these states. Comprehensive agreements on trade and economic cooperation were also concluded. The Soviet Union provided preferential loans to the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe. When concluding peace treaties with former allies Germany, at the Paris Peace Conference (1946-1947), Soviet diplomacy tried in every possible way to protect the interests of Eastern European countries. It became possible to talk about the complete foreign policy alignment of the countries of Eastern Europe with Moscow after in 1947, the countries of this region, following the USSR, refused to join the Marshall Plan.
At the end of the 1940s. The interaction of the countries of South-Eastern and Central Europe with the USSR and among themselves acquired a very close and multidimensional character. By 1949, all Eastern European countries had signed treaties of friendship and mutual assistance with each other. On all issues of world politics within the UN, they took a position in solidarity with the point of view of Moscow. The number of military specialists and advisers from the USSR in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe has increased. The basis of the political and ideological interaction of the ruling regimes was cooperation through the Cominform, in whose activities the ruling communist parties of all European countries took part, except Albania and East Germany. Eastern European communist parties fully supported the leading positions of the CPSU(b) in the international communist movement.
The basis formed in the second half of the 1940s. The world socialist system, on a par with the USSR, was precisely a conglomerate of Eastern European “people's democracies”. In 1947-1948 consultations were held on the conclusion of multilateral economic agreements between Eastern European countries. In January 1949, at a meeting in Moscow, representatives of the USSR, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Czechoslovakia signed an agreement on the creation of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). In February 1949, Albania joined the CMEA. The main tasks of the new general organization were the coordination of economic plans based on specialization and cooperation of production, comprehensive economic, scientific and technical cooperation, mutual assistance to each other with raw materials, food, machinery, equipment, etc. The creation of CMEA meant that, in foreign economic terms, the countries of Eastern Europe became even more focused on the USSR and moved away from the West.
A serious test for the alliance of the USSR and the “people's democracies” of Eastern Europe was the Soviet-Yugoslav conflict - the first crisis in the “Eastern bloc”. It was caused by objective and subjective reasons: the personal rivalry of Stalin and Tito, Moscow’s concerns about the evolution of the socio-economic development of Yugoslavia (the idea of workers’ self-government) and Belgrade’s desire to play a decisive role in the Balkans (the Yugoslav leadership wanted to create a Balkan Federation and annex Albania). The first accusations against the Yugoslav leadership were made by Stalin and the CPSU(b) in February 1948. Official correspondence between the CPSU(b) and the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CPYU) did not lead to thawing of the situation, and at the Cominform meeting in Bucharest in June 1948. An anti-Yugoslav resolution was adopted, “excommunicating” the Communist Party of Yugoslavia from the communist movement. The Communist Party of Yugoslavia was expelled from Cominform, the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies soon denounced treaties of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance with Yugoslavia, there was a complete break in military and political relations with Belgrade, and economic agreements with it were also terminated. However, Stalin failed to achieve a replacement of the Yugoslav leadership; the congress of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia in July 1949 supported Tito's course; in the late 1940s. thousands of pro-Soviet communists in Yugoslavia were subjected to repression. On the contrary, real and imaginary supporters of Broz Tito were subjected to repression in the communist parties of Eastern European countries.
The present Yugoslav government is in complete dependence from foreign imperialist circles and turned into an instrument of their aggressive policy, which should have led and actually led to the elimination of the autonomy and independence of the Yugoslav Republic.
Note from the Soviet government to the Yugoslav government (1949)
The final and complete victory of the pro-Soviet communist parties in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe by the end of the 40s of the 20th century. marked the continuation of the process of total and uncritical copying by the authorities of these countries of the political, economic and social system that existed in that historical period in the Soviet Union. The constitutions of Eastern European countries enshrined provisions that characterized the social system of these states as a “dictatorship of the proletariat.” At all levels of government, real leadership was concentrated in the hands of the corresponding committees of Marxist-Leninist parties, even if formally in a number of countries (GDR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria) a multi-party system was maintained. The activities of national democratic fronts, trade unions, youth, student and women's organizations were subordinated to the interests of the ruling political parties. Until the mid-1950s. In various countries of Central and Eastern Europe, in particular in Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, the personality cult of national and party leaders was clearly manifested. In the first half of the 1950s. judicial prosecutions of political opponents and “factionalists” continued (the case of Rudolf Slansky in Czechoslovakia, the case of Wladyslaw Gomulka in Poland), any real opposition activity turned out to be impossible.
But even in conditions of political totalitarianism, open protests took place in the “communist” countries of Europe. Thus, the decision of the GDR government to introduce new rates for wages in industry caused popular discontent in East Germany in June 1953. There were strikes, arson of party committees, and attacks on prisons. With the help of the Soviet military contingent in the GDR, the unrest was suppressed. In 1953 1954 There were also economic strikes in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania.
The complete "communization" of Eastern European societies in economic terms meant the triumph of the industrialization process on the Soviet model. The emphasis was on the accelerated development of heavy industry and the creation of a military-industrial complex (MIC). All Eastern European countries adopted 4-6-year national economic plans that were of a directive nature. The state modernized or in some cases created such branches of heavy industry as metallurgy, mechanical engineering, machine tool building, chemical industry, etc.
At the same time, most Eastern European countries pursued a strict policy towards collectivization of agriculture. Farmers who joined agricultural cooperatives were promised tax benefits. But it must be borne in mind that not all countries of Eastern Europe (for example, Poland and Czechoslovakia) were completely done away with market relations in town and countryside; in a number of countries, individual farms in the countryside were preserved, and small workshops, shops, hairdressers, and restaurants were allowed to remain in personal ownership.
The socio-economic development of Yugoslavia was distinguished by its originality. After Tito's break with Stalin and the international communist movement, self-managerial socialism began to develop in Yugoslavia, distinguished by such features as the creation of workers' councils at state enterprises, decentralization of the national economy, greater independence of enterprises, economic accounting, and the rejection of a directive planning system.
Socially, Eastern European societies in the 1950s were not yet homogeneous. Although the big and middle bourgeoisie had already ceased to exist, the communist authorities had to take into account the presence of large layers of the petty bourgeoisie in the city and countryside. The working class was officially declared the hegemon of the social movement, the vanguard of which was the ruling Marxist-Leninist parties. Nominally, workers and employees received many new social gains (progressive labor legislation, paid benefits for disability and illness, increased vacation time, etc.), but in most countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe the general financial situation of the working masses in the 1950s gg. continued to be difficult.
After the communist parties began to exercise undivided political dominance in all countries of Eastern Europe, the ideological, military and foreign policy dominance of the USSR in this region of Europe was preserved and strengthened. There were very close and varied forms of partnership between the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern and Central Europe along state and party lines. The USSR had the closest relations with Bulgaria, the GDR, and Czechoslovakia. There was close coordination of foreign policy at the international and regional levels. The USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe demonstrated complete solidarity at the UN on the German issue, attitude towards the “Korean War”, problems of decolonization, disarmament, atomic weapons, etc.
Together with the Soviet Union, the countries of Eastern and Central Europe opposed Western plans for the reunification of Germany and defended a plan for a German confederation that would preserve the “gains of socialism” in East Germany. After unrest in the GDR, the USSR refused to receive further reparations from East Germany, and in 1954 the GDR was granted full sovereignty in matters of international politics.
Activities of the CMEA in the first half of the 1950s. contributed to the final approval of the planned directive economy in Eastern Europe. For the first half of the 1950s. Trade turnover between the CMEA member countries increased one and a half times. The emphasis was on the export of machinery and equipment, the supply of oil, grain and meat products. By the middle of the decade, only a quarter of the foreign trade turnover of Eastern European countries was accounted for by Western countries.
After Germany was admitted to NATO and the Western European Union, Moscow and its Eastern European allies decided to intensify the process of military-political integration. On May 14, 1955, at a meeting in Warsaw, a collective agreement on friendship and cooperation was signed
and mutual assistance. Thus, the Soviet Union, East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania and Hungary created the Warsaw Pact Organization (WTO) - a single military-political bloc, the purpose of which was to ensure the security of member countries. Mutual consultations on issues of international relations and immediate consultations in the event of a threat of aggression were provided for. Such general authorities were created as the Political Advisory Committee, the Joint Armed Forces, the Joint Military Command, and the Department of Internal Affairs Headquarters. In all these structures, Soviet representatives initially played a leading role. The creation of the Department of Internal Affairs finally formalized the bipolar nature of international relations in Europe.
The Contracting Parties agreed to create a Unified Command of their armed forces, which will be allocated by agreement between the Parties to the authority of this command, operating on the basis of jointly established principles. They will also take other agreed measures necessary to strengthen their defense capabilities in order to protect the peaceful labor of their peoples, guarantee the inviolability of their borders and territories and provide protection from possible aggression.
"Warsaw Pact" (1955)
Until the death of I.V. Stalin, relations between Yugoslavia, on the one hand, and the Soviet Union and countries oriented towards it, on the other, remained extremely tense. On the borders of Yugoslavia with Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, there were constant shootings and provocations. Yugoslavia in the first half of the 1950s. received regular military assistance on the part of the USA and Great Britain, actively carried out foreign policy cooperation with Greece and Turkey. Only in June 1953 did the USSR and Yugoslavia again exchange ambassadors, recalled in the late 1940s; After this, a number of trade agreements were signed. On the initiative of N.S. Khrushchev, a commission was created on the “Yugoslav question”. In mid-1955, an official visit of Soviet leaders to Belgrade took place. As a result of the visit, the normalization of interstate relations was recorded; Moscow recognized Yugoslavia as a socialist state. After this, relations between Yugoslavia and other socialist countries in Europe began to normalize.
The decisions of the 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956) had a huge impact on the evolution of relations between the USSR and Eastern European countries. This party forum consolidated Khrushchev’s course towards de-Stalinization and peaceful coexistence with the states of the capitalist system. The documents adopted by the congress spoke of respect for the specifics of building socialism in individual countries.
In the mid-1950s. in Eastern and Central Europe there was a process of changing party and government leaders; this trend only intensified after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. In almost all countries of Eastern Europe, with the exception of Albania, a process of “thaw”, similar to the Soviet Union, began, the rejection of the cult of personality, and the rehabilitation of victims of unjustified repressions in the post-war years began. The dissolution of Cominform in 1956 confirmed these trends.
However, the weakening of political totalitarianism also stimulated the growth of reformist sentiments in wide circles of the population of Eastern European countries, including among representatives of the intelligentsia, specialists, and workers. In a number of states (Poland, Hungary), anti-communist and anti-Soviet circles raised their heads, which led in 1956 to open political confrontation in these states.
Against the background of de-Stalinization processes in Poland in the mid-1950s. there was a decline in the living standards of the population and a decrease in real wages. In the summer of 1956, strikes took place in Poznan and a number of other Polish cities, and dozens of people died as a result of clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement agencies and military personnel. In October 1956, at the plenum of the Central Committee (Central Committee) of the ruling Polish United Workers' Party (PUWP), Władysław Gomułka, who had been subjected to repression in the late 1940s, was elected 1st Secretary of the Central Committee. The new leadership of the PUWP set a course towards abandoning the forced collectivization of agriculture and normalizing relations with the Catholic clergy. The socio-political situation in Poland gradually normalized.
The situation in Hungary was much more difficult for the communists. There, the processes of overcoming the personality cult of M. Rakosi and E. Gere led to mass student and worker demonstrations, which in the fall of 1956 took place under openly anti-communist and anti-Soviet slogans. On October 24, 1956, communist reformer Imre Nagy was appointed head of government, and a decision was made to reorganize the ruling Hungarian Workers' Party into the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (HSWP), but all these measures could not prevent open anti-communist protests in Budapest and a number of other cities in Hungary. The right-wing opposition enjoyed material and informational assistance from Western countries and at the same time managed to enlist the support of a significant part of the Hungarian population. At the end of October, open attacks on public and party institutions and clashes with law enforcement agencies and military personnel began in Budapest. The threat to the “socialist system” in Hungary was quite real, which forced the USSR leadership, with the approval of other allied countries but the ATS, to send regular Soviet military units to suppress the uprising. In Hungary itself, the government was reorganized and headed by the new head of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, loyal to Moscow, Janos Kadar. The open intervention of the USSR in events in Hungary caused significant damage to the foreign policy image of the Soviet Union, but saved the communist regime in Hungary: the uprising was brutally suppressed.
The protests in Poland and Hungary in 1956 were directed against local authorities, the USSR and the social system that had developed in these countries. They could not but lead to the evolution of the socio-political system in the countries of Eastern Europe. Largely under the influence of these events in the second half of the 1950s. there was a strengthening of powers
legislative bodies, weakening the interference of party authorities in the activities of economic institutions, expanding the capabilities of youth, women's organizations and trade unions.
The "Thaw" led to the fact that in most countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe the planned economy became more flexible. The course towards further industrialization was continued, but at the same time the national authorities began to pay more attention to improving the standard of living of workers and the development of the light and food industries. In Poland and Hungary state enterprises gained greater independence, cooperation began to develop to a greater extent, and certain elements of workers' self-government appeared. In general, in Eastern Europe by the end of the 1950s. The public sector occupied fundamental, leading positions in the economy.
Events in Poland and especially in Hungary in 1956 forced the Soviet leadership, not only in theory, but also in practice, to pursue a more equal policy towards its allies in Central and South-Eastern Europe. The Soviet Union agreed to partial and then complete write-off of the debts of the socialist countries. In 1957, agreements were concluded regulating the legal status of Soviet troops in the territories of Hungary, the GDR, and Poland. By 1958, Soviet troops were completely withdrawn from Romania. After 1956, the number of Soviet military contingents in Eastern Europe decreased.
At the same time, the leading role of the Soviet Union in the Warsaw Pact Organization was established. Military-political cooperation between the USSR and Eastern European countries moved to more high level, regular joint military exercises began to be held.
In the second half of the 1950s. The USSR and its Eastern European states made joint attempts to form an “optimal structure” of cooperation national economies through the launch of the “international socialist division of labor”, based on the mutually beneficial principles of socialization and cooperation of production. In 1959, the CMEA member countries adopted the Charter of the organization. It contained the provision that all recommendations and decisions in the Council are made with the consent of interested parties. Certain attempts were made (despite opposition from Albania) to attract Yugoslavia to economic cooperation Eastern European countries.
But the USSR’s allies in Central and Eastern Europe continued to fully and completely support Moscow’s foreign policy course on all key problems of world politics. The defensive doctrine of the ATS was formed largely in accordance with Soviet geopolitical interests. Moreover, the “Eastern bloc” was much more ideologically and politically monolithic in the 1950s than the Western camp.
Compared to other countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, it was unique and original foreign policy Yugoslavia. Belgrade retained fairly broad trade contacts with Western European countries, but at the same time, in foreign policy terms, the Yugoslav communist leadership proclaimed a course of non-alignment. Yugoslavia established friendly relations with leading developing countries (Egypt, India, Indonesia), and at the UN interacted primarily with the independent countries of Asia and Africa.
The USSR and its Eastern European allies continued to closely coordinate their positions on the German problem. In 1956, the decision of the East German leadership to create People's Army GDR. In 1958, the countries participating in the Warsaw Warsaw Forces supported the initiative of East Germany to conclude a peace treaty with Germany and the renunciation of both German states from possession nuclear weapons. The USSR and its Eastern European allies in the late 50s. XX century insisted that a future united Germany should not be part of any military blocs. However, the approaches of the leading Western powers and the Warsaw countries on the German and Berlin problems were of an opposite nature.
At the end of the 1950s. The positions of the superpowers regarding Berlin are escalating and becoming tougher. During this period, the USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe carried out regular and full-fledged consultations on issues related to the status of West Berlin. The existence of an open border between the GDR and West Berlin allowed thousands of East German citizens to leave the territory of the GDR.
Surveyor. Who is a surveyor? Description of the profession. Profession surveyor Surveyor training
Magellanic clouds: who are they?
Pepper Steak Sauce Creamy Pepper Sauce
How to create a competent portfolio for a designer
If you dreamed that a house burned down - interpretation of the dream according to the dream book