Strengthening the relations of the USSR with the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe. Topic3. foreign policy of the USSR, relations with neighboring countries, the European Union, the United States, third world countries
In the field of foreign policy, the beginning of the 70s. was marked by a radical turn towards a real "détente" of tension between East and West. It was caused by the stabilization of mutual relations Soviet Union with the socialist countries (previously a priority in the foreign policy of the USSR) and emerging in the late 60s. changes in the position of Western European states interested in the development of economic cooperation.
In 1966, France withdrew from the military structures of NATO, and in the same year, French President Charles de Gaulle visited the USSR under the slogan of deepening Soviet-French ties. The President of France declared: "France intends to develop cooperation with the USSR, in particular, in the political field very deeply." Soviet-French summit meetings in the 70s. became a constant phenomenon: they took place in 1970, 1971, twice in 1973 and twice in 1974. French presidents J. Pompidou, J. d "Estaing visited the Soviet Union; France - L. I. Brezhnev, A. N Kosygin and other responsible persons As a result, a number of agreements were signed in the field nuclear energy, space and communications (SECAM color television system 1965). Even earlier, strong economic ties between the USSR and Italy were established, which resulted in the construction in the USSR by the Fiat company of an automobile plant in the city of Naberezhnye Chelny (1966). The Soviet Union supplied Italy with oil and gas enriched with uranium, in turn, large-diameter pipes were supplied to the USSR.
The victory in the elections of 1969 in the FRG by a coalition of social democrats and free democrats led to an improvement in Soviet-German relations. On August 12, 1970, the Treaty on the Settlement of Territorial Issues was signed in Moscow between the USSR and the FRG, recognizing the borders of all states in Europe, including the western border of Poland along the Oder-Neisse and the border between the GDR and the FRG. In 1970-1973 the government of W. Brandt signed similar agreements with Poland, the GDR and Czechoslovakia. On September 3, 1971, a quadripartite agreement was signed between the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France on West Berlin. The German question, for a long time the most acute in the relationship between East and West, was largely resolved.
The result of the peaceful progressive process in Europe was the Helsinki Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) July 3 - August 1, 1975 Representatives of 33 European states, as well as the United States and Canada, were present in Helsinki. The meeting was attended by: General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU L. I. Brezhnev, President of the United States J. Ford, President of France V. Giscard d "Estaing, Prime Minister of Great Britain G. Wilson, Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany G. Schmidt, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the PUWP E Terek, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, President of Czechoslovakia G. Gusak, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED E. Honecker, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the BCP, Chairman of the State Council of the NRB T. Zhivkov, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the HSWP J. Kadar, General Secretary of the RCP , President of Romania N. Ceausescu, Chairman of the CYU, President of Yugoslavia I. Broz Tito and other leaders of the participating states.The Declaration adopted by the CSCE proclaimed the inviolability of European borders, mutual renunciation of the use of force, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-interference participation in the internal affairs of the participating countries, respect for human rights, etc.
Against the background of the convergence of the positions of the USSR and Western European powers in the 70s. there is an improvement in relations between the Soviet Union and the United States, which subsequently made it possible to call the 70s. a period of relaxation of tension. To a certain extent, this was due to the established nuclear parity between the two superpowers. The beginning of detente was laid by the visit of US President R. Nixon to Moscow in May 1972. During the meeting of the American President with L. I. Brezhnev, an agreement was reached on certain measures in the field of limitation of strategic offensive arms (SALT-1). Both sides recognized in the treaty that "in the nuclear age there is no other basis for maintaining relations between them than peaceful coexistence." In Moscow, an indefinite anti-missile defense (ABM) treaty was also concluded, according to which the parties assumed an obligation to have no more than 200 anti-missiles in service and two areas for their deployment, including the capitals. In June 1973, L. I. Brezhnev made a return visit to the United States, where the Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War was signed. During the Washington meeting, about twenty cooperation agreements were concluded in various fields, including the Soyuz-Apollo joint space program (implemented in 1975). During the 1974 summer meeting in the Crimea, R. Nixon and L. I. Brezhnev agreed to limit underground tests, reduce the number of missile defense missiles, and also halve the missile defense systems, leaving them only around the capitals. Despite Nixon's forced resignation in August 1974, the summit meetings continued a few months later, when in November 1974 the new US president, J. Ford, and L. I. Brezhnev met in Vladivostok. Previous agreements were confirmed, and a further limitation of nuclear weapons was announced. The deepening of détente in the subsequent period was prevented by the frank US stake on new type weapons (cruise missiles) and the erroneous decision of the Soviet Union to deploy RSD-10 missiles (SS-20 according to NATO classification) in the European part of the USSR in 1977. This was a serious miscalculation of the Soviet leadership, which led to an aggravation of relations with countries Western Europe. In 1979, nevertheless, an agreement was reached on signing a new SALT-2 treaty, but the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan led to the disruption of the ratification process, to a new round of tension in relations between the USSR and the USA.
Three periods can be distinguished in the development of relations between the USSR and the USA in the 1980s. The first of them covers mainly 1981-1984. It was characterized by a military-political confrontation between the two states over the deployment of medium-range missiles on the European continent; unsuccessfully held in 1981-1983. Soviet-American negotiations on the limitation of nuclear weapons in Europe and on the reduction of strategic offensive arms; bad political climate and growing mistrust and suspicion of the parties to each other; minimizing contacts and ties in the spheres of bilateral Soviet-American relations.The second period (1985-1986) was marked by the beginning in March 1985 of new Soviet-American negotiations on the limitation of nuclear and space weapons, the gradual restoration of the mechanism of political dialogue between the two countries, incl. and on highest level.
In November 1985, a Soviet-American summit meeting (M.S. Gorbachev and R. Reagan) took place in Geneva. It resulted in an open broad dialogue, which had a significant impact on the general situation in the world, and also marked the beginning of cooperation in a number of areas of bilateral relations between the USSR and the USA. Both sides declared that "a nuclear war must not be unleashed and there can be no winners" and pledged not to seek military superiority, stressed the importance of preventing any war between them - nuclear or conventional.
In October 1986, MS Gorbachev and R. Reagan met in Reykjavik. The significance of this meeting lies primarily in the fact that it discussed specific formulas for a radical reduction in nuclear weapons proposed by the Soviet side.
From March 1987, Soviet-American relations entered a third period. Political contacts at various levels have noticeably intensified. In the course of very intensive diplomatic contacts in the spring and especially in the fall of 1987, it was possible to complete the elaboration of a treaty on medium and short-range missiles, and to agree on holding a third Soviet-American summit meeting in December of the same year, this time in Washington.
It became obvious that, due to economic difficulties, the United States was unable to finance all the military programs pushed by the Pentagon. In 1985, the US Congress froze military spending, and in 1987 even a certain reduction began. Criticism of the administration's foreign policy, and especially its course toward the Soviet Union, intensified in the country.
An important link in the development of Soviet-American relations was the summit meeting in Moscow, which took place from May 29 to June 2, 1988. The very fact that the summit was held and the preparations for it not only consolidated significant positive changes in Soviet-American relations, but also gave new impetus to their development. Ratification of the Treaty on Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, exchange during the meeting of instruments of ratification on the entry into force of this treaty, further progress in finalizing an agreement on a 50% reduction in strategic offensive arms, signing agreements on the Afghan settlement before the meeting, conclusion of a number of agreements on further improvement of the mechanism for preventing nuclear war, as well as the development of bilateral cooperation - all these are concrete evidence of the ongoing normalization of Soviet-American relations, the introduction of additional elements stability and consistency.
DEVELOPING NEW LANDBOOKS IN FOREIGN POLICY
At Stalin's funeral, at least three times in the speeches of G. Malenkov, V. Molotov and L. Beria, the Soviet leadership called for "peaceful coexistence", which becomes the leitmotif of Soviet foreign policy for the next decade. With the death of Stalin, many political forces in the West linked their hopes for an early weakening of the Soviet Union and its role in the international arena. However, these calculations were not destined to come true in full. On the contrary, soon after the changes in the Soviet leadership, the new leaders take important foreign policy steps aimed at revitalizing Soviet foreign policy. So, already in the summer of 1953, as a result of the joint efforts of the Chinese and Soviet sides, it was possible to put an end to the protracted Korean War. Positive results of Soviet diplomacy were also achieved in other areas. In 1954, with our active assistance, another hotbed of tension was extinguished: under pressure from the international community, France had to stop the colonial war it had unleashed against the peoples of Indochina, and French troops left Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Soon agreements were concluded in Geneva, according to which France recognized the independence of these states. After the USSR renounced territorial claims to the Kars and Ardagan districts, as well as from plans to change the regime of the Black Sea straits, relations with Turkey are normalized.
Complex processes during this period occur in countries of Eastern Europe with whom, after the victory over fascism, the Soviet Union developed strong good neighborly relations. At the same time, not all political forces in these countries perceived positively the beginning of rapprochement with the “great eastern neighbor". The death of Stalin in virtually all these states was accompanied by an increase in tension. Events developed especially dramatically in the GDR, which managed to turn into the main outpost of the Sovietization of Eastern Europe. Here it came to mass demonstrations of the workers. According to modern estimates, 267 thousand people took part in the riots that unfolded on June 16-17, 1953, 110 enterprises were on strike, demonstrations swept 7 district centers, 43 district cities and 105 others settlements. Only the intervention of Soviet troops made it possible to normalize the situation. Soviet historians virtually unanimously insisted that the riots in the GDR were provoked by Western intelligence agencies. Today there are other points of view. According to one of the modern versions, Beria could be behind the events, who sought to implement his course towards Germany, according to another, the riots were directed, on the contrary, by the rivals of the all-powerful people's commissar, who tried to discredit his proposal to abandon the construction of socialism in the GDR. This is evidenced, in particular, by the fact that it was Beria who was instructed to coordinate actions to suppress popular uprisings in East Germany, and during the absence of the latter in the country, the main preparatory measures were taken to remove him.
Be that as it may, under the impression of the crisis in the GDR, the Soviet leadership in 1953-1954. softens its tone in relations with partners from Eastern Europe. Persistent advice and appeals were received from the Kremlin to the Eastern European capitals to begin some liberalization of the regimes. Under these conditions, the Hungarian leaders become the object of criticism, who, in Moscow's opinion, were pursuing an excessively harsh course of sovietization of the country. In order to avoid complications, the Hungarians were asked to abandon the policy of mass repression, as well as go to the division of the post Secretary General Hungarian Labor Party and the President of the Council of Ministers. It was during this period, in July 1953, that I. Nagy, who later played an extremely important role in the development of Soviet-Hungarian relations, entered the political scene, who, with the support of Malenkov (and, probably, Beria, in the 1930s, Nagy was a secret agent of the NKVD, on whose denunciations the Hungarian communist-internationalists were shot) receives the post of head of the Hungarian government. Liberalization processes began in Poland, where the process of rehabilitation began and censorship was somewhat relaxed. From the conclusion came the former leader of the Polish Workers' Party, whom historians consider "the ideologist of the Polish path to socialism." Also for 1953-1954. there are the first attempts to normalize relations with the leader of Yugoslavia, B. Tito, so far, however, have not yielded any positive results.
In the middle of 1950s. international relations entered a new phase. With the entry of West Germany into NATO and the formation of the Warsaw Pact Organization in 1955, the formation of a bipolar world ends. At the same time, the process of decolonization and the emergence of “third world” countries is beginning to have an increasing impact on the balance of power. Important changes are also taking place in the foreign policy of the Soviet Union. They were connected with the decisions of the XX Party Congress. Although Malenkov's concept of the impossibility of winning a nuclear war was not in demand, the basis of the foreign policy of the USSR was the idea of the possibility of peaceful coexistence of states with different socio-political systems. So, back in 1955, at a summit meeting in Geneva, the USSR proposed to reduce the armed forces of the USSR, the USA and China to 1-1.5 million within two years, and France and Great Britain to 650 thousand people. But even after receiving a negative reaction in the West to its proposals, the USSR continued its peaceful foreign policy and in the same 1955 announced a unilateral reduction of its army by 640 thousand people. In 1956, even more large-scale reductions followed - by 1.2 million people, and in 1957 another 300 thousand were dismissed from the army. Soviet military bases in China and Finland were liquidated. In July 1955, the USSR, at a meeting of the heads of government of the leading world powers, made a proposal on collective security in Europe, but the United States, Britain and France rejected them. In the same year, with the active participation of Soviet diplomacy, the difficult Austrian issue was resolved: Austria proclaimed itself a neutral state and established partnership relations with the USSR.
In 1957, the Soviet Union took the initiative to stop nuclear tests, and in 1958, it unilaterally stopped such tests. In the same year, the USSR and the USA signed an agreement on cultural cooperation. In 1959, N. Khrushchev paid a visit to the USA. Pursuing a policy of rapprochement with the West, Khrushchev in 1956 restored Soviet-Japanese diplomatic relations. In exchange for the conclusion of a peace treaty, Khrushchev agreed to transfer two of the four islands of the Kuril chain to the Japanese. It was an unprecedented act when the victorious country, and not the defeated country, agreed to territorial concessions in exchange for making peace. Khrushchev's gesture was greeted with understanding by the Japanese side. Khrushchev's attempt to achieve the entry of the USSR into the aggressive NATO bloc, which was actually ignored by the leaders of Western states, becomes a major miscalculation.
CRISIS MOMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
At the same time, in addition to initiatives aimed at rapprochement with the West, the Soviet leadership in the 1950s. steps are being taken that are extremely negatively received by foreign policy partners. In the 1950s in the USSR, a large-scale rearmament of the army with new types of equipment, including new types of nuclear missile weapons, began. Although the United States still had an overwhelming advantage in the number of nuclear warheads (17 American warheads per Soviet warhead), the possibility of Soviet nuclear retaliation had a sobering effect on the Western powers. Largely due to this, the Soviet Union managed to thwart the aggression against Egypt in 1956: the Soviet threat to influence the aggressor countries through not only diplomatic but also military means led to the immediate restoration of peace in the Middle East. Fear of Soviet military power made it possible to put the Berlin crisis of 1961 into a constructive direction, during which American tanks were put forward directly on the line separating West Berlin from East. The result of the Berlin crisis was the construction by the leadership of the GDR of the Berlin Wall, which for many years became a symbol of a divided humanity and the Cold War.
The most acute conflict for the entire period of political activity of N.S. Khrushchev took place in 1962 and was called the "Caribbean Crisis". The reason for it was the plans to introduce American nuclear missiles into Turkey. In search of a response to the aggressive actions of the United States, in the spring of 1962 the Soviet Union concludes an agreement on military cooperation with Cuba, where in 1959 the anti-imperialist revolution headed by F. Castro won. On the basis of the agreements reached, in the summer of the same year, the deployment of Soviet medium-range nuclear missiles (Operation Anadyr) began in Cuba. When the Americans found out about the actions of the Soviet side, a serious international scandal erupted. The United States began to demonstrate its readiness to invade Cuba, declared a sea and air blockade of the island of Freedom (as Cuba was called in the Soviet press). The American military was put on alert. In response to the measures taken by the Americans, military preparations began in the Soviet Union. The world is on the brink of nuclear war. But at the last moment, the Soviet leader and US President D. Kennedy managed to find something like a compromise. Soviet missiles were evacuated from Cuba, and the Americans limited themselves to guaranteeing the security of Cuba, and also agreed not to deploy their missiles in Turkey. After the Cuban Missile Crisis, a new phase of detente opened. At the same time, in general, the international situation continued to be determined by the confrontation between the two superpowers and two different socio-political systems. Periods of mitigation of confrontation quickly ended with new conflicts, in which third world countries were increasingly drawn into.
RELATIONS WITH THE COUNTRIES OF SOCIALISM
A new word was also heard at the 20th Congress in relation to the countries of socialism. It was recognized that there are many ways of transition to a socialist society. In 1955 there was an improvement in relations with Yugoslavia. In the same year, a military-political bloc of European socialist countries was formed, which seriously strengthened the security and authority of the USSR. However, in the future, there is an increase in contradictions in the socialist countries. To a large extent, tension in the socialist countries was caused by the 20th Congress of the CPSU. Many communist parties refused to support Khrushchev's ambitions and join the anti-Stalin campaign. Often it was about small radical communist parties, but among them was the second most powerful Chinese Communist Party. Mao Zedong, who headed it, recognized the leading role of the USSR under Stalin, but did not agree to recognize Khrushchev's leadership, himself claiming to be the leader of the communist movement. The policy of the USSR under Khrushchev was declared revisionist, diplomatic relations between the USSR and China were frozen. China finally declared its independence after the "Caribbean Crisis", accusing Khrushchev of capitulation to imperialism. The Chinese Communists were supported by Albania and North Korea.
Not only excesses in de-Stalinization, but also its inconsistency, superficiality, and cosmetic nature had a negative effect on the foreign policy of the USSR during the years of Khrushchev's rule. Many people in the socialist countries believed the Soviet leader, believed in his sincere commitment to democracy. The expectation of democratic change swept the countries of Eastern Europe. Confrontation with reality breeds disappointment. Tensions on this ground arose in 1956 in relations with Poland, which declared its desire to build socialism, but without blind imitation of the Soviet experience. Long-standing anti-Russian sentiments revived in the country. Refused to obey the dictates of Moscow, which demanded the economic integration of the countries of Eastern Europe, Romania. Moscow saw in this country the basis for the development of agriculture, while the Romanians themselves were determined to carry out Soviet-style industrialization in their country. The peak of disagreements between the USSR and Romania fell on 1961-1962. Fearing a rapprochement between Romania and Albania and the PRC, the Soviet Union softened its claims. The Romanian leaders, who were interested in economic and political support from the USSR, did not begin to bring the situation to a complete break. But the distrust between the two countries that arose during these years, to one degree or another, made itself felt until the collapse of the Soviet bloc.
However, Soviet-Hungarian relations developed most dramatically during this period. In the autumn of 1956, Hungary experienced major upheavals, which some historians call a people's revolution, others - a counter-revolutionary rebellion. As is often the case in history, there are strong arguments on each side: movements of this magnitude are always complex in nature and raise the most diverse forces to life. The reason for the Hungarian events was the collapse of the Stalinist system on an international scale after the revelations made by N.S. Khrushchev at the 20th Party Congress. The anti-Soviet slogans under which the renewal movement was unfolding, as well as undercover data about the readiness of the West to intervene in the Hungarian events, caused serious concern among the Soviet leadership. Soviet troops entered Hungary. At the same time, the use of weapons against popular uprisings had the most detrimental consequences both for the foreign policy prestige of the USSR and for the democratic tendencies of internal development.
USSR AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
An important direction in the foreign policy of the USSR in the 1950s. relationship with the third world. In 1960, the UN General Assembly, on the initiative of the Soviet delegation, adopted the Declaration on the granting of independence to all colonial peoples. The young states, freeing themselves from colonial dependence, naturally oriented themselves towards the Soviet Union as a country advocating equality in international relations. The USSR was forced to reckon with its new international role, paying for the growth of its political influence with economic assistance to developing countries, often carried out to the detriment of its own economic stability. The growing influence of the Soviet Union in regions of the world that the West is accustomed to seeing as a zone of its own interests aroused the concern of the United States and its allies. Third world countries became the arena of clashes between the two superpowers. It is no coincidence that at the 20th Congress the national liberation movement, along with the communist and workers' movements, was proclaimed one of the most important driving forces progressive renewal of the world.
In the mid 1950s. N. Khrushchev and N. Bulganin made visits to Burma, Afghanistan, India, during which important economic and political agreements were concluded. Soviet-Indian relations developed especially successfully. Thus, in just three years from 1953 to 1956, the trade turnover between the two countries increased 31 times. Egypt, where in 1952 the national liberation revolution won, became another important partner of the USSR in these years. During a visit to the country in June 1956 by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR D. Shepilov, the Soviet side agreed to provide Egypt with major economic assistance. Soon, in response to the US refusal to allocate loans for the construction of the Aswan Dam, the head of Egypt, G. Nasser, announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal. The former British-French Canal Company attempted to blackmail the Nasser government by withdrawing its pilots who had been guiding ships through the narrow and difficult fairway. Then the Soviet Union came to the aid of Egypt. By order of Khrushchev, experienced pilots from the USSR were sent to Egypt. The Soviet side expressed its readiness to assist Egypt in the construction of the Aswan dam. Due to Soviet assistance, Egypt covered up to 50% of the cost of economic development. In addition, relations between the USSR and Indonesia, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Congo and other states of Asia, Africa, and Latin America were actively developing during these years. In total, during these years, the USSR signed treaties of friendship and cooperation with more than 20 developing countries.
2. FOREIGN POLICY OF THE USSR IN 1964-1985
RELATIONS OF THE USSR WITH WESTERN COUNTRIES: ON THE COURSE OF DETECTION
After 1964, the foreign policy pursued by the Soviet Union became more stable and balanced, but at the same time more conservative. Just as in the domestic political sphere, in the field of foreign policy, the new leadership of the country faced a set of unresolved problems left over from the previous decade. Relations with the West were on the verge of breaking. Serious internal contradictions were growing in the socialist countries, and the crisis of the world communist movement, which began after the 20th Party Congress, continued to worsen. The position of the USSR in the third world was unstable. All these problems had to be solved against the backdrop of a slowdown in the country's economic development and stagnation in the socio-political and spiritual spheres.
The position of the USSR in the international arena was largely determined by the existence of two socio-political blocs, one of which was formed around the Soviet Union, and the second around the United States. In this vein, not only the strength of the USSR's positions in the world, but also internal stability depended on relations with the countries of the West. The constantly aggravated arms race placed a heavy burden on the Soviet economy, urgently demanding from the leadership of the USSR not only to constantly improve the country's defense power, but also to find ways to compromise with the leaders of Western states. Row important steps the Soviet leadership took steps in this direction already in the second half of the 1960s and early 1970s, which made it possible to seriously reduce the threat of a world thermonuclear war. The new level of relations between the West and the countries of the Eastern bloc, the compromise reached between them, went down in history as a "detente of international tension."
The construction of the detente building began with a significant improvement in relations between the Soviet Union and France. The rapprochement of the two countries was facilitated by the decisive, independent policy pursued by the President of France, General Charles de Gaulle. In 1966, he announced France's withdrawal from the NATO military organization and the desire of the French leadership to pursue a foreign policy independent of America. In 1966 de Gaulle visited the USSR. As a result, a declaration was adopted, which proclaimed the desire of the two friendly powers to strengthen the "atmosphere of detente" between East and West. France and the USSR agreed to hold regular consultations, the purpose of which was proclaimed to be the development of Franco-Soviet relations "from agreement to cooperation."
In the same years, important shifts were taking place in relations with the Federal Republic of Germany, where the left-wing progressive forces won the elections in September 1969. The Social Democrat W. Brandt, who became chancellor, officially recognized that the re-establishment of a united Germany should not be a stumbling block on the path of rapprochement between the positions of states with different social order which is called the "New Ostpolitik". Within its framework, in 1970, an international treaty was concluded, according to which the FRG renounced its claims to the GDR and other countries of Eastern Europe and recognized the inviolability of post-war borders in Europe. The following year, 1971, another step was taken in resolving the German question. The governments of the USSR, USA, Great Britain and France signed a quadripartite agreement on West Berlin. The agreement declared that West Berlin is not part of the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany, and will not be governed by it in the future.
The defining direction in which detente developed was Soviet-American relations. In 1967, the USSR, the USA, and Great Britain sign an agreement on the peaceful use of outer space. The following year, 1968, one of the most important international documents was adopted, long years until the end of the 20th century. which was the basis of international security and trust between states: the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. According to this treaty, nuclear weapons or their components were not supposed to go beyond the boundaries of the five states that already had them by that time (USA, USSR, Great Britain, France, China). The Federal Republic of Germany also joined the treaty, which sharply increased its significance and removed the concern that the Soviet side had about the possibility of West Germany developing nuclear weapons. The American leadership, headed by President R. Nixon, now declared its readiness in its relations with the USSR to count not only on force, but also on the negotiation process.
The reasons for this dramatic change in US policy were not accidental. The arms race unleashed by Western countries and, above all, by the United States, according to Western politicians and experts themselves, had no military meaning. First of all, it was designed to undermine the economy of the USSR. But these calculations were not fully justified. If back in 1962, at the time of the Caribbean crisis, the USSR was losing to the United States in all components of nuclear weapons, then in less than 10 years the situation has changed radically. The main determining factor in world politics from that moment until the destruction of the USSR was the achievement by the Soviet Union of military-strategic parity. The United States was still significantly ahead of the USSR in terms of the number of nuclear charges, but in terms of the number of delivery vehicles, the gap was overcome: the USSR now had 2320 strategic delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons, the United States had 2323. In the American headquarters, they started talking about the fact that now the USSR could retaliate under any set of circumstances, become fatal for the United States. Because of this, a split arose in the American elite. Some politicians, military and businessmen could not come to terms with what had happened and demanded revenge at any cost. However, another grouping of more sober-minded and far-sighted politicians, headed by President Nixon, who advocated constructive relations with the Soviet Union, temporarily prevailed.
In the early 1970s the Soviet leadership came up with important initiatives in the field of improving the climate in relations between different states. The complex of foreign policy initiatives, which Western authors often associate with the personality of the then Soviet leader, was called the "Peace Program". This program was announced by him in the Report of the Central Committee to the XXIV Congress of the CPSU. As emphasized by the Soviet side, the Peace Program was based on the "Leninist principle of the peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems." Its main provisions boiled down to the following: a ban on weapons of mass destruction; complete elimination of nuclear weapons by all countries possessing them; limitation and complete cessation of the arms race; reduction in the size of the armed forces of states; elimination of hot spots; creation of a system of collective security in Europe and throughout the world; dissolution of military blocs; withdrawal of foreign troops from the territory of other states; support for the struggle of the peoples of the world for independence and free development; deepening and strengthening mutually beneficial cooperation between peoples; mutual renunciation of the use of force. In the future, the Peace Program was supplemented and developed in the decisions of the XXV and XXVI Congress of the CPSU.
The Soviet peace program met with powerful support from progressive and democratic forces in all states of the planet. As early as 1971, the USSR was seeking the adoption of an agreement banning the placement of nuclear weapons on the seabed. In 1972, previous agreements with Western countries were supplemented by a convention on the prohibition of biological weapons. In the same year, American President R. Nixon made a historic visit to the USSR. During the visit, the fundamental document "Fundamentals of Relations between the Soviet Union and the United States of America" was signed. It contained the recognition that "in the nuclear age there is no other basis for relations other than peaceful coexistence." At the same time, the parties signed the Interim Agreement on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT-1). It set limits for both sides on the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched missiles (SLBMs). Of fundamental importance was also the treaty on the limitation of anti-missile defense systems (ABM), which became an important constraint on the path of a further arms race. A significant step that consolidated the achievements of the detente policy was the signing on August 1, 1975 in the capital of Finland of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Helsinki Agreement provided for the recognition of the equality of the participating countries, the inviolability of post-war borders, peaceful cooperation in Europe and around the world. The joint flight of the Soyuz and Apollo spacecraft, which was successfully carried out in the summer of 1975, became a kind of symbol of the era of detente.
Gradually, however, the policy of detente began to be revised. A dangerous turn in US policy began to take shape even before the signing of the Helsinki accords. One of the key episodes that showed the direction of the evolution of US foreign policy was the refusal of the US Congress to grant the Soviet Union the most favored nation in trade. The reason for this was the question of the emigration of Jews from the USSR, which was completely irrelevant to the sphere of bilateral relations. The signing of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe was used by Western partners to further increase pressure on the USSR in the field of "human rights", which caused protest and alertness on the part of the Soviet leadership.
In addition to strengthening the ideological confrontation, the United States is heading for the technical re-equipment of strategic and conventional weapons. Back in 1971, the American leadership put forward a strategy of “realistic deterrence,” which did not provide for the preservation of approximate equality of the parties. The focus was on achieving technological superiority. Around the mid 1970s. in the United States begins the creation of fundamentally new types of weapons that can dramatically change the balance of power in the international arena in favor of the aggressor countries: MX intercontinental ballistic missiles, Trident submarine nuclear missile systems, stealth bombers (stealth bombers) . A decision is made to deploy neutron weapons in European countries in 1978, which the USSR had long sought to ban. And in 1979, the NATO Council approved the decision to deploy 672 of the latest American cruise missiles and Pershing-2 missiles in the countries of Western Europe.
After President R. Reagan came to power, another, especially fierce stage of the Cold War started. The United States is starting to work on the creation of weapons of a fundamentally new type - space weapons. The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) undermined power parity. Called the “Star Wars program” in the world press, SDI was taking the arms race to a higher and more dangerous level. At the same time, the United States sought to achieve decisive superiority in conventional weapons: by the mid-1980s. 94 NATO divisions in Europe were opposed by only 78 divisions of the countries participating in the Warsaw Treaty Organization (at the same time, the number of NATO divisions was 16-23 thousand people, and the ATS division was only 11-12 thousand). The unwillingness of the American side to compromise, the refusal to ratify the agreements already reached led the negotiation process to a dead end. Propaganda pressure on the Soviet Union also intensified. Reagan proclaimed the USSR an "Evil Empire" and announced the start of a crusade against it. The achievements of previous years of detente policy were threatened. The USSR was forced to take measures to increase its defense capability and security: since 1977, in the European part of the USSR, and since 1983, in the territory of the GDR and Czechoslovakia, the deployment of new Soviet medium-range missiles RSD-10 (according to NATO terminology - SS-20) began .
DEVELOPMENT OF COOPERATION WITH SOCIALIST COUNTRIES
More successfully, but sometimes just as contradictory, was the cooperation between the USSR and the countries of socialism. The main direction in the development of relations between the USSR and its allies is the process of integration and the international division of labor within the framework of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. The beginning of a new important stage in the development of CMEA falls on 1971, when the Comprehensive Program for the Further Deepening and Improvement of Cooperation and the Development of Socialist Economic Integration of the CMEA Member Countries was adopted, designed for 15-20 years. In its development, long-term programs were adopted in the field of: 1) energy, fuel, raw materials; 2) agriculture; 3) mechanical engineering. In 1985, a new Comprehensive Program of Scientific Progress of the CMEA member countries up to the year 2000 was adopted, which provided for integration in the fields of electronics, nuclear energy, automation, new materials, and biotechnologies. The most important economic projects within the CMEA during these years were the construction of the second branch of the Druzhba oil pipeline, the Soyuz gas pipeline, and the creation of the unified energy system Mir. One of the key areas of cooperation between the countries of the socialist community is the program of joint space exploration within the framework of the Interkosmos program. For the 1970s With the assistance of the USSR, more than 1,600 enterprises and other facilities were built in the CMEA countries, and more than a thousand more enterprises and other facilities were being built.
At the same time, the difficulties experienced by the Soviet Union in economic and social development caused some of its partners to seek to reorient themselves towards the West. A striking manifestation of the new trends was the policy pursued in 1968 by the leadership of Czechoslovakia. The changes concerned not only the relative democratization of the regime, but also a significant expansion of Czechoslovakia's ties with the West, while simultaneously limiting cooperation with the USSR. The policy pursued in Czechoslovakia, by analogy with Khrushchev's "thaw", was called the "Prague Spring". In Czechoslovakia, social instability grew, social conflicts intensified, confrontation between supporters and opponents of the USSR, interethnic relations aggravated. The situation of the "Prague Spring" in which the Soviet leadership fell is called by some modern analysts "a typical historical trap." Military intervention in the center of Europe promised the Soviet Union an aggravation of relations with Western countries and a general decline in prestige in the international arena. But inaction and the temptation to let the development of events take its course created a threat of exit from the socialist community, first of Czechoslovakia, and then of some other states. Any decision could be fatal. After long hesitations and consultations, a forceful way out of the crisis was chosen. On August 21, 1968, troops of five states were introduced into Czechoslovakia: the USSR, Bulgaria, Hungary, the GDR, and Poland. Militarily, the operation was well prepared and successful, but the political consequences were unexpected for the Soviet leadership. Massive anti-Soviet demonstrations took place on the streets of Prague, Bratislava and other cities.
Constant threats to Soviet influence arose in Poland. Twice, in 1970 and 1981, this country experienced acute political crises. As an alternative to the local communists, the independent trade union Solidarity, which was the embryo of political opposition, arose and quickly won the support of the population. Periodically, unrest and anti-Soviet sentiments arose in other countries of Eastern Europe, where many were dissatisfied with the division of the continent into two warring blocs and the subordination of the countries of Eastern Europe to their “big brother”. In response to this, protective tendencies begin to sharply increase in the USSR. The new moods of the Soviet leadership were voiced by L. Brezhnev at the Fifth Congress of the Polish United Workers' Party on November 12, 1968. He formulated an important ideological directive, according to which the USSR had the full right to defend the gains of socialism in all states allied to it, including by armed means, since all attempts at reform in them were allegedly provoked by Western intelligence services and internal counter-revolution, which was only partly fair and did not take into account the independent role of the peoples of the socialist countries.
The Soviet leader frankly warned that, in the event of the appearance of “weak links” in the single chain of states of the “socialist front” and the emergence of a “threat to the cause of socialism” in one country or another, “this already becomes not only a problem for the people of this country, but also a common problem the concern of all socialist countries.” Concluding his speech, Brezhnev said: “Let those who are inclined to forget the lessons of history and who would like to redraw the map of Europe again know that the borders of Poland, the GDR, Czechoslovakia, like any other country participating in the Warsaw Pact, are unshakable and inviolable. These borders are being defended by the entire armed might of the socialist community.” The words of the Soviet leader were met with stormy approval. The new concept of relations between the USSR and its allies was called by the Western press the "Brezhnev Doctrine" or otherwise the "doctrine of the limited sovereignty of the socialist countries." Later, it acquired an even more radical content: the Soviet leadership declared its right to defend the gains of socialism not only where they had already established themselves, but also in countries that were just turning towards the path of socialism.
Despite the toughening of its foreign policy towards the socialist countries, the USSR failed to overcome the friction in its relations with Albania, North Korea, Romania, and Yugoslavia. All of them claimed to maintain their independence from the Soviet Union. Relations with China were balancing on the brink of war and peace. The removal of N. Khrushchev, it would seem, opened the way for rapprochement between the two leading socialist powers. However, since the mid-1960s in the PRC, a "cultural revolution" begins to be carried out - the restructuring of society according to the recipes of the leftist ideology of Maoism. The Chinese leadership deliberately went to the deterioration of relations with the Soviet Union, all cultural, humanitarian, economic and political contacts between the countries are curtailed. Small border skirmishes between Soviet border guards and Chinese military personnel become frequent. Only for 1967-1968. about 6 thousand cases of direct provocations from the Chinese side were recorded. In 1969, the leader of China, Mao Zedong, decided to test the strength of the borders of his northern neighbor. Pursuing hegemonic goals, China carried out large-scale armed attacks on the USSR in the area of Damansky Island in the Far East and in the area of Semipalatinsk in Central Asia. During the fighting on March 2, 1969, 31 Soviet border guards died on Damansky Island, 14 were injured of varying severity. Artillery and heavy machine guns were widely used. The fighting continued on March 14-15. Only after the use by the Soviet side of the Grad multiple launch rocket systems, which covered Chinese territory 20 km2 in depth and inflicted severe damage on Chinese troops, was the anti-Soviet adventure stopped. Having received a rebuff, China moderated the tone of its territorial claims against the USSR for many years, although minor armed provocations continued later. Only a few decades later, after M. Gorbachev and B. Yeltsin came to power, some disputed territories (including Damansky with a monument to Soviet border guards located there) were transferred to the Chinese side.
USSR AND DEVELOPING STATES
Relations with the developing states of Asia, Africa and Latin America played an increasingly important role in the foreign policy of the Soviet Union. Back in the mid 1950s. the so-called. Non-Aligned Movement. Its emergence and further development was influenced by two major global processes: the collapse of colonial empires and the ongoing cold war. Non-alignment meant maintaining the independence of young states from the centers of the bipolar world - the USSR and the USA, therefore, in relation to the participants in the movement, the concept of "third world countries" is often used. The idea of non-alignment did not mean passivity and detachment of developing states from what was happening in the international arena or self-isolation from those facing all of humanity. global problems. On the contrary, objectively the peoples' struggle for liberation from the colonial yoke strengthened the positions of the USSR, which sought to reorganize international relations on the principles of equality and mutual security. Because of this, the Non-Aligned Movement was potentially a geopolitical ally of the USSR in strengthening the policy of peace and international cooperation.
The coincidence of goals in opposing the neo-colonialist expansion of Western countries contributed to the strengthening of the positions of the Soviet Union in the countries of the "third world". One of the most important foreign policy partners in the countries of the "third world" is India - the second most populous country in the world, which also has a powerful economy and rich natural resources. In 1971, a friendship treaty was concluded between our countries, which provided a solid basis for further rapprochement between the two peoples. In November 1982, the official friendly visit to the USSR of the leader of India, Indra Gandhi, became a significant event in the entire international life. For the Soviet side, strong friendly relations with India were of particular importance due to the difficulties that existed between the USSR and China. In 1971, a friendship agreement was signed with Egypt, and a year later - with Iraq, one of the largest oil-producing powers. Ties were strengthened with another strategic importer of hydrocarbon raw materials - Iran, in which in 1979 an anti-American Islamic revolution took place. The geography of partner relations between the USSR and developing countries was constantly expanding. If by the mid-1970s The Soviet Union had agreements on cooperation with 54, then in the mid-1980s - already with more than 70 states of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
The outpost of the Soviet influence of the USSR in the third world was the developing states, whose leaders declared a course towards socialist construction. So, in the Western Hemisphere, which was considered quite recently the last "patrimony" of the United States, the Soviet Union successfully cooperated with Cuba. The Cuban leader F. Castro repeatedly visited the USSR. The USSR was the most important foreign economic partner of the "Island of Freedom" - in the mid-1980s. the turnover of Soviet-Cuban trade amounted to 5.84 billion rubles. The experience of the Cuban Revolution had a great impact on neighboring peoples. In 1979, the military dictatorship collapsed in Nicaragua, where democratic and patriotic forces led by the Sandinista National Liberation Front came to power. In the same year, diplomatic relations were normalized between our countries and active economic cooperation began. African countries developed economic and military-political cooperation with such socialist countries as Egypt (until 1976) and Somalia (until 1977). After reactionary forces came to power in these countries, Ethiopia became the most important strategic partner of the USSR in this region of the world. Soon, Soviet military bases were transferred here from Somalia, and large-scale economic assistance began. In southern Africa, Angola and Mozambique, which gained independence as a result of the fall of the fascist regime in Portugal in 1974, declared their socialist choice.
Syria remained a reliable partner of the USSR in Asia. In October 1980, our countries signed a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation, designed to serve to strengthen cooperation between the two countries, to achieve a comprehensive just peace in the Middle East. Relations with Vietnam were successfully developing in the Far East. Later, the People's Democratic Republic of Laos entered the orbit of Soviet influence, in which the anti-monarchist revolution won in 1975. In the same 1975, the prerequisites for establishing friendly relations between the Soviet Union and Cambodia, where the pro-American puppet regime was overthrown. However, in the wake of the popular liberation movement in Cambodia, the dictatorial regime of the Khmer Rouge came to power. The threat to Soviet influence in the region disappeared when, under the pressure of popular resistance, the Maoist dictatorship of Pol Pot and Ieng Sari collapsed, and the creation of the USSR-friendly state of the People's Republic of Kampuchea was proclaimed. In February 1980, a delegation from the People's Republic of China visited Moscow. During it, a Soviet-Kampuchean statement, agreements on economic, technical, cultural and scientific cooperation, as well as an agreement on trade and economic relations were signed.
The confident penetration of the Soviet Union into those regions of the world that in the not so distant past were a zone of undivided domination by imperialist states aroused concern and revanchist sentiments in the West. As part of the "contain and push back communism" strategy, the United States made military and diplomatic attempts to overthrow Soviet-friendly regimes in Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, and many other countries. The Soviet Union was forced to accept a geopolitical challenge. The rivalry between the two superpowers took the form of either subsiding or escalating regional conflicts.
The war in Vietnam becomes a symbol of American policy directed against the struggle of peoples for independence. With US support, in 1955 a puppet pro-Western regime was created in South Vietnam. In an effort to prevent the creation of a unified Vietnamese state, America waged a constant struggle against the national liberation forces in southern Vietnam, and in 1964-1968 and 1971-1972. unleashes open aggression against socialist Vietnam. The USSR and other countries of the socialist community provided the Vietnamese with effective assistance. American aggression ended in complete failure. In 1973, an agreement was signed in Paris to end the war in Vietnam, and in 1975 the puppet regime in Seoul fell. In 1978, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam becomes a member of the CMEA.
In 1967, Israel, behind which, as always, was the United States, struck at Jordan, Syria and Egypt, occupying over 68 thousand square meters. km. Under the control of the invaders were the West Bank of the Jordan River, the Sinai Peninsula up to the Suez Canal, and some other territories. The USSR resolutely sided with the Arab states. In June 1967, diplomatic relations were severed with him in "a sign of protest against Israel's aggression". Soviet military specialists went to Syria and Egypt, and arms supplies expanded. In October 1973, a new Arab-Israeli war began. During the hostilities, Egypt was able to answer for the defeat of 1967, which was humiliating for the Arabs. The Egyptian army, using Soviet weapons and equipment, was able to cross the Suez Canal and liberated its eastern bank. The myth of the invincibility of the Israeli armed forces has been seriously shaken. The Soviet Union continued to consistently defend the interests of the states subjected to aggression and the Arab people of Palestine, which contributed to the growth of its authority and influence throughout the Arab world.
Afghanistan becomes the largest center of armed confrontation between the two superpowers. The Soviet leadership in 1979 introduced the so-called "limited contingent" of the Soviet Army into this country. The regime of H. Amin that existed in Afghanistan was overthrown. Amin himself, who was suspected of sympathizing with China, was captured in his palace by the KGB special unit Alpha and killed. B. Karmal, supported by the USSR, came to power in Afghanistan and began to carry out economic and political reforms along the lines of the Soviet ones. Seeing the strengthening of the positions of the USSR in Afghanistan, the United States began to actively supply the Afghan armed opposition with weapons and money, supported it informationally and politically. Assistance to the rebels was also provided by China, Pakistan, and some other states. As a result, the land of Afghanistan became the scene of a bloody and prolonged civil war. The participation of the USSR in the Afghan civil war cost the Soviet people about 15 thousand lives, turned into an increase in foreign policy isolation and colossal military spending.
Separate foreign policy miscalculations and defeats could not stop the progressive development of relations between the Soviet Union and the states of the "third world", many of which saw in rapprochement with our country a guarantee of their independence and prosperity. Thanks to the assistance and gratuitous assistance of the USSR, hydrotechnical and water management complexes arose in Iran, Angola, and Tunisia; energy in Egypt, mining in North Yemen, Mali, Guinea-Bissau. If by the mid-1970s in the countries of the "third world" the Soviet side built or was building 899 large industrial and other economic facilities, then by the mid-1980s. the number of such objects was already approaching 4 thousand. Contrary to the erroneous assertion that has often been heard since the “Gorbachev perestroika” that the Soviet side provided assistance to developing states unilaterally, to the detriment of its economic interests, in reality, cooperation developed on a mutually beneficial basis. The penetration of the USSR into the strategically important regions world contributed not only to its military security, but also to the strengthening of the weight in international trade, created new markets for Soviet industry. Strengthening itself in regions with a warm climate and rich natural resources, the USSR was able to ensure its complete economic independence, and in the long term, to save huge amounts of money on the development of its own natural resources, which, as a rule, are located in hard-to-reach areas of the country. In general, as some modern authors emphasize, Soviet policy in the "third world" was developed and implemented on the basis of the realities of the bipolar world, split into two blocs hostile to each other, and did not depend much on those political and ideological clichés and shells in which it, if necessary, draped.
© All rights reserved
1. Aggravation of international tension in the first half of the 80s.
2. Perestroika in the USSR and changes in relations between East and West.
3. The system of international relations at the turn of the century.
At the turn of the 1970s and 1980s, detente gave way to a new aggravation of international tension. This was caused by the actions of the USSR to strengthen its position in the world. In 1975 - 1979 The USSR strengthened its positions in Africa at the expense of Angola, Mozambique and Ethiopia, in Asia at the expense of Cambodia, in America at the expense of Nicaragua. The deliveries of Soviet weapons to Syria and Libya increased noticeably. In 1978, the USSR deployed a new class of SS-20 missiles in Europe, which changed the balance of nuclear forces in Europe in favor of the USSR. In December 1979, the USSR sent its troops into Afghanistan and established a pro-Soviet regime there. All these actions of the USSR were regarded by the US authorities as the desire of the Soviet leadership for world domination. The United States responded to Soviet actions by boycotting the 1980 Moscow Olympics and by imposing a ban on the supply of food and the latest equipment to the USSR. President Carter did not dare to take more decisive action.
Relations between the USA and the USSR became even more aggravated after R. Reagan came to power in the USA, who believed that Carter was behaving too softly. Reagan sharply increased spending on arms production, hoping to economically exhaust the USSR, whose economic situation was constantly deteriorating. In 1983, the United States began developing the SDI program, which provided for the creation of a nuclear missile shield in space to protect the United States from Soviet missiles. At the same time, the United States launched work on the creation of the Stealth stealth aircraft. In 1981 - 1984 The United States increased the production of nuclear and conventional weapons, stepped up military assistance to the opposition in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola and Mozambique.
The USSR responded to these US actions by deploying its missiles in the GDR and Czechoslovakia, and in 1983 it broke off negotiations with the US on the reduction of strategic arms and began to build up its military potential. In addition, a real ideological war broke out between the USA and the USSR. Both sides accused each other of striving for world domination and declared their determination to do everything to prevent such domination.
Simultaneously with the deterioration of relations between the superpowers, the number of local conflicts increased. In February - March 1979, war broke out between China and Vietnam. In 1980, a war broke out between Iran and Iraq over a disputed section of the border area. It lasted until 1988 and ended in vain, despite heavy losses on both sides. In 1982, there was a war between Britain and Argentina over the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, a disputed territory between the two countries. In 1982, Israel sent troops into Lebanese territory and captured a 30-kilometer strip along the Israeli-Lebanese border in order to block the penetration of Palestinian militants into its territory.
Since the mid-80s in the development of international relations began new stage. It was associated with the coming to power in the USSR of a new leadership headed by M. Gorbachev, who formulated the concept of new political thinking, which contained a new philosophy of the foreign policy of the USSR. Since 1985, Gorbachev has put forward a whole series of proposals for disarmament and for expanding cooperation between the USSR and Western countries. Western leaders were initially wary of these proposals, regarding them as a propaganda ploy. However, the Soviet initiatives received broad support from the population of Western countries, which forced politicians to respond to Gorbachev's proposals.
One of the manifestations of this reaction was the resumption of the Soviet-American dialogue at the highest level. Since 1985, meetings between the leaders of the USSR and the USA have become regular, at which the leaders of the superpowers exchanged their views on the most important international problems and coordinated the positions of their countries. The content of Soviet-American relations also changed: from confrontation in the international arena, the USSR and the USA switched to cooperation and in a number of ways. international problems took the same position. This cooperation made it possible in the late 1980s to resolve local conflicts in Nicaragua and southern Africa. At the same time, in the second half of the 1980s, cooperation between the USSR and the USA intensified in the economic, scientific, technical and cultural spheres. The United States began to provide economic assistance to the USSR, and also pushed the countries of Western Europe and Japan to increase such assistance to the USSR.
Changes in Soviet-American relations made it possible for the first time in the post-war period to begin the process of disarmament. In December 1987, the US and the USSR signed the INF Treaty, according to which medium and short-range nuclear missiles, which accounted for more than 4% of all nuclear weapons, were destroyed. In July 1991, the US and the USSR signed the START-1 treaty, which provides for a 30% reduction in strategic offensive weapons. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia continued its policy of disarmament. In January 1993, the US and Russia signed the START-2 treaty. 2003 The US and Russia signed the START-3 treaty, which was not ratified. But in 2009, a new treaty was signed to reduce the number of nuclear weapons. At the same time, the reduction of other types of weapons began. In 1990, an agreement was signed between NATO and the Warsaw Pact to reduce conventional weapons in Europe by about 2/3. In 1993 more than 150 countries signed the agreement on chemical weapons. It entered into force in 1997 and provides for the elimination of chemical weapons within 10 years.
Changes in the foreign policy of the USSR made it possible to bring to new level pan-European process. In 1989, the USSR abandoned the suppression of anti-communist revolutions in the CSEEC countries and allowed them to pursue an independent foreign policy. The USSR also did not oppose the unification of Germany, which took place on October 3, 1990. In November 1990, a Charter for a New Europe was adopted in Paris, in which the Warsaw Pact and NATO pledged to build relations on the basis of partnership and friendship. In June-July 1991, the CMEA and the Department of Internal Affairs were dissolved. Thus, the split of Europe in two ended, the level of military confrontation decreased and opportunities appeared for creating a united Europe.
In the 1990s, there were serious changes in the balance of power in the international arena. After the collapse of the United States became the undisputed world leader. Many countries of the world began to focus on the United States in their foreign policy, which allowed the United States to seek the adoption of favorable decisions in the UN. At the same time, the United States increasingly began to dictate its terms to various countries of the world and even imposed sanctions through the UN against countries whose policies did not suit Washington. The United States began to increasingly use force to strengthen its position in the world (Operation Desert Fox against Iraq in 1998, military operation NATO against Yugoslavia in 1999, the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001, the overthrow of the Iraqi regime in 2003). The desire of the United States for world hegemony has caused discontent among other countries. In the 1990s, many experts believed that Russia, China or the EU countries would become a counterweight to the United States in the international arena. But to date, none of these forces has been able to become such a counterbalance.
Relations with Europe have always played an important role in Russia's foreign policy. Recall that perestroika began in the USSR after M. Gorbachev put forward the famous slogan "United Europe from Vladivostok to Gibraltar."
As a matter of fact, the consent to the unification of Germany was considered by the ideologists of perestroika as the first step towards achieving this completely utopian goal. Naturally, this kind of illusion had to be got rid of rather soon, but the very idea of rapprochement with the European Union in order to create a new pole of world influence as opposed to the United States did not leave the minds of Russian politicians for a long time. It suffices here to recall the concept of the Moscow-Berlin-Paris axis, actively supported at one time by President Boris Yeltsin. However, as expected, nothing came of this, except for a few anecdotal stories, since half-ruined Russia had practically nothing to offer Europe, which, in turn, was more interested in the most free access for its companies to our natural resources.
However, in general, in the 1990s, relations between Russia and the European Union developed positively, although the existing partnership potential was far from being fully used. In 1994, these relations were proclaimed the top priority for Russian foreign policy and economic ties. In the same year, Russia and the EU signed the “Partnership and Cooperation Agreement”, however, even in this really important area of foreign policy, Russia was unable to develop an effective cooperation strategy without even using the existing agreements. It suffices to give one example that clearly demonstrates not a declarative, but a real attitude of the Russian leadership towards this problem - for three years, starting from 1994, Russia was unable to appoint its ambassador to the European Union in Brussels. True, the European side is also partly to blame for this, since the Russia-EU agreement was ratified by all the countries of the European Union only at the end of 1997, after which it entered into force.
Vladimir Putin initially acted in the same vein as his predecessor, while trying to maintain good relations with the United States as well. However, after the “orange revolution” of 2004 in Ukraine, it became obvious that Russia, as before, “has no other allies except the army and navy”, and that no matter what contradictions arise between the United States and Europe, in relation to our country they will always work together.
It was the Ukrainian events that became the reason for the Russian leadership to reconsider the entire foreign policy of the country, including in the European direction. Economic growth, the strengthening of the country's internal unity, and the political stabilization of the first seven years of the new century made not only possible, but also necessary, a more aggressive and active foreign policy. The first tentative step was the same Ukraine, the gas blockade of which made the Europeans notice how much they depend on Russian energy supplies. At the same time, they discovered that they did not have any serious opportunities to ensure the reliability of these supplies without taking into account the interests of Russia itself. It turned out that during the first years of President Putin's rule, the Russian government fully restored state control over its mining industry, pushing foreign companies and companies with serious foreign participation. The sensational “YUKOS case” was just a spectacular tip of the iceberg, showing how far the Russian authorities can go if necessary to ensure the country's energy sovereignty.
It must be said that over the last years of the past decade, Russia has done everything to make the reliability of energy supplies to Europe a political issue. This became especially noticeable in the summer of 2006 during the struggle between Russia and the EU over the "Energy Charter", which was an attempt to force Russia to commit itself to guarantee the reliability of gas supplies to Europe, regardless of the political situation. After lengthy negotiations, however, it turned out that Moscow is not satisfied not so much with the proposed payment for such self-restraint (although we were not promised mountains of gold or major political concessions either), but with the very approach in which Russia’s ability to manage its own natural resources and the political advantages arising from them are constrained by some international agreements that were regarded as a limitation of Russia's state sovereignty.
However, it is thanks to such intransigence that the largest success of Russia's European policy so far has become possible - the Nord Stream Baltic gas pipeline, which will provide direct deliveries of Russian gas to Germany and other countries of Western Europe along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, bypassing transit countries, primarily Ukraine. and Poland. It is not surprising that this project immediately met with such desperate resistance, including overseas. The implementation of the project will actually exclude from the global Russian-European relations the countries of the Baltic States and Central and Eastern Europe, which are today the main conductors of American influence on the continent. In turn, the Russian project of the South Stream gas pipeline has become an alternative to the European project of the Southern Gas Corridor, which is planned to consist of three links: the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline (this project provides for the delivery of natural gas from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to Azerbaijan); the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline (from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey) and Nabucco (from Turkish Erzurum to Austrian Baumgarten through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary). In the EU, this gas pipeline is considered as a means of getting rid of energy dependence on Russia. True, even after construction is completed, this pipeline will be able to satisfy no more than 5% of the EU's gas needs, but despite this, the Southern Gas Corridor project is in direct competition with the Russian South Stream, which, as planned, will pass from Novorossiysk along the bottom Black Sea to Bulgaria, and then two branches through the Balkan Peninsula will go to Italy and Austria, which, in turn, will reduce the dependence of the Russian Federation on transit countries.
Analyzing Russian policy towards the EU, it is important to remember that the development of cooperation with this European institution is impossible, however, outside the general context of relations with other European and Euro-Atlantic institutions, such as the OSCE, NATO, and the Council of Europe. And the strategic task of cooperation may be the creation of a "space of security, stability and cooperation in Europe", which implies political, military, economic, social, cultural, informational, environmental and other dimensions.
In this regard, both in Russia and in the states of the European Union, there is a consensus that it is impossible to build such a “space” without our country.
However, for fruitful cooperation with the EU, Russia should give up a number of illusions and stereotypes. It should be realized: that Russian security as a whole does not weaken if the number of EU countries increases and the potential for European integration increases; that such concepts of traditional international relations as "balance of power" and "spheres of interest", as well as "conflicting alliances" are outdated; in the past they were seen as stabilizing factors, but in the past these "stabilizers" regularly led to war; that attempts to play on real and imaginary contradictions between the EU and the US are doomed to failure; that today attempts to create military-political or economic unions with the participation of Russia, China, India or other Asian countries as a counterweight to NATO and the EU are nothing more than an illusion; that hopes for long-term appreciation and gratitude for unilateral steps towards the interests of the EU or other international institutions are naive and quite illusory. Declarative promises of partners must always be recorded in a binding document for them. legal form; that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe should no longer be treated as "ungrateful" apostates and that constructive political and economic cooperation should be built with them, since its absence undermines any possibility of creating a system of cooperative security and strategic partnership in Europe.
