60. Germany after World War II: from split to unification (1945 - 1990).
After the termination of the state existence of Germany on May 23, 1945, the territory of the former Austria (divided into 4 zones of occupation), Alsace and Lorraine (returned to France), the Sudetenland (returned to Czechoslovakia), the region of Eupen and Malmedy (returned part of Belgium), the statehood of Luxembourg was restored, the territories of Poland annexed in 1939 (Posen, Wartaland, part of Pomerania) were separated. The Memel (Klaipeda) region was returned to the Lithuanian SSR. East Prussia is divided between the USSR and Poland. The rest is divided into 4 occupation zones - Soviet, American, British and French. The USSR transferred part of its occupation zone east of the Oder and Neisse rivers to Poland.
Members of the anti-Hitler coalition, primarily the United States, the USSR, Great Britain, and later France, at first sought to implement a coordinated occupation policy. The main tasks in this policy were demilitarization and "denazification".
The principles of the occupation policy and most of the territorial changes were fixed by the Potsdam Agreement.
Later, the political and economic unification of the American, British and French occupation zones took place in the so-called. Trizonia, since 1949 the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG).
A peace treaty with Germany following the results of World War II has not been signed to date.
Federal Republic of Germany
The Federal Republic of Germany was proclaimed in 1949 on the territory of the British, American and French occupation zones. The capital of Germany was the city of Bonn. France tried to separate the Saar region from Germany, but in the end, under the Luxembourg Treaty of 1956, the Saarland was reunited with Germany.
Thanks to the help of the Americans under the Marshall Plan, rapid economic growth was achieved in the 1950s (the German economic miracle), which lasted until 1965. To meet the demand for cheap labor force Germany supported the influx of guest workers, mainly from Turkey.
Until 1969, the country was ruled by the CDU party (usually in a bloc with the CSU and less often with the FDP). In the 1950s, a number of emergency laws were developed, many organizations were banned, including the Communist Party, and professions were banned. In 1955 Germany joined NATO.
In 1969, the Social Democrats came to power. They recognized the inviolability of post-war borders, weakened emergency legislation, and carried out a number of social reforms. In the future, the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats alternated in power.
West Berlin
Since 1945, Berlin has been divided between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition into four occupation zones. The eastern zone, occupied by Soviet troops, later became the capital of the German Democratic Republic. In the three western zones, control was exercised, respectively, by the occupying authorities of the United States, Great Britain and France.
After the formation of the FRG and the GDR, both states declared their claims to sovereignty over West Berlin.
With the conclusion of the Quadripartite Agreement on September 3, 1971, the ratio of the FRG - West Berlin - GDR was put on a new legal basis. The occupation regime remained in West Berlin.
In 1990, West Berlin became part of a united Germany.
German Democratic Republic
The proclamation of the GDR took place on October 7, 1949 - a month later, in response to the creation of the three western occupation zones of the Federal Republic of Germany on the territory.
The USSR removed machinery and equipment from the Soviet occupation zone and levied reparations from the GDR. Only by 1950 did industrial production in the GDR reach the level of 1936. The events of June 17, 1953 in the GDR led to the fact that instead of collecting reparations, the USSR began to provide economic assistance to the GDR.
As proclaimed, the citizens of the GDR had all democratic rights and freedoms. Although the Socialist Unity Party of Germany occupied the dominant position in the country (its leading role was enshrined in the Constitution), four other parties existed alongside it for decades.
The pace of economic development of the GDR was lower than in Germany, and the lowest among the states Warsaw Pact. Nevertheless, the standard of living in the GDR remained the highest among the Eastern European states. By the 1980s, the GDR had become a highly developed industrial country with intensive agriculture. In terms of industrial output, the GDR occupied the 6th place in Europe.
Berlin Wall
The lack of a clear physical boundary between the zones of occupation in Berlin led to frequent conflicts and a massive drain of specialists from the GDR. East Germans preferred to get an education in the GDR, where it was free, to work in West Berlin or the FRG. In August 1961, the GDR authorities began building a guarded wall that physically separated West Berlin from the GDR. The Berlin Wall was largely destroyed in 1990.
Modern history of Germany
Gorbachev's reforms in the USSR were perceived with caution by the authorities of the GDR and with enthusiasm in the FRG. In 1989, tensions in the GDR began to increase. In the fall, long-term leader of the country Erich Honecker left his post as top party leader, his place was taken by former leader Union of Free German Youth Egon Krenz. However, he did not stay at the head of state for long, only a few weeks. In early November, a grandiose demonstration began in Berlin, ending with the destruction of the Berlin Wall. This was the first step towards the unification of the two German states. Soon, the German mark of the FRG came into circulation on the territory of the GDR, and in August 1990, the Treaty on the Establishment of Unity was signed between the two parties.
Germany's constitution was adopted 60 years ago
In "perestroika", among other "historical revelations", it was also put forward that only the USSR, specifically Stalin, was to blame for the post-war split in Germany. This statement can still be found on the pages of not only foreign, but also Russian press. However, now that the passions have subsided, it has become clear that many of those "exposures of Stalinism" were nothing more than a heap of malicious lies.
The assertion that the USSR uncompromisingly led the case for the breakaway of East Germany and the creation of a “socialist German state” there in its own image and likeness is no exception. However, the way Soviet historiography and propaganda presented the history of Germany in the first post-war years, placing the main responsibility for the split of Germany on the policies of the United States and Great Britain, turns out to be closer to the truth than the fashionable “democratic interpretation”.
Let's start with the purely legal facts. The current constitution of the new state entity - the Federal Republic of Germany - was promulgated on May 23, 1949. Its draft was developed and adopted by 65 representatives of the Landtags of the lands that were part of the so-called Trizonia, an association of the American, British and French occupation zones, which was created in 1948, gathered in Bonn. With some amendments, the draft constitution was approved by the military governors of the Western powers on May 12, 1949.
In accordance with the constitution, in August 1949, elections to the Bundestag were held in the West German lands, and on September 20, the first allied government headed by Konrad Adenauer was formed. The Soviet occupation zone was initially excluded from this process. Only after the split of Germany became a fait accompli, on October 7, 1949, the creation of the German Democratic Republic was proclaimed in the eastern part of the country.
The preservation of its name on the world map after the Second World War, Germany owes a lot to Stalin.
When a radical turning point came in World War II and the prospect of a final victory was ahead, F. Roosevelt and W. Churchill (January 1943, Casablanca), without the knowledge and participation of the USSR, put forward a demand for unconditional surrender to Nazi Germany. Stalin post-factum joined this declaration. This formulation of the war aims meant that the Allies assumed responsibility for the post-war organization of Germany. Projects began to emerge, at first vague, what to do with this country after the victory.
At the Tehran Conference of the Chief Executives of the Three Great Allied Powers (November 28 - December 1, 1943), the German question became one of the subjects of discussion. Detailed plans were prepared by Roosevelt and Churchill. The US President proposed dividing Germany into five states: 1) Prussia; 2) Hannover and Northwest Germany; 3) Saxony; 4) Westphalia, Hesse and the western bank of the Rhine; 5) Bavaria, Württemberg and Baden. In addition, the Ruhr, the Saar region and the Kiel Canal were proposed to be placed under the international control of the future United Nations or the three great powers, and Hamburg to be made a "free city". A similar plan was proposed by Churchill. At the same time, the British Prime Minister proposed to include southern lands Germany into the Danube Confederation, which was also to include Austria and Hungary.
Stalin at that moment did not have a clear plan for the post-war territorial structure of Germany, with the exception that the new eastern borders of Poland were planned to be pushed back in the west at the expense of Germany. But Stalin immediately expressed doubts about the expediency and feasibility of his projects. Western allies. According to Soviet leader, any confederation is not viable, and among the Germans, divided into several states, there will always be a strong desire for unification.
So, already during the Tehran conference, the dominant approach of Stalin to the German question was revealed: it is difficult and inexpedient to impose someone else's will on an entire nation.
On the eve of the Yalta meeting of the "Big Three" (February 4-17, 1945), memorandums on the post-war dismemberment of Germany were developed by some Soviet diplomats, especially those who, even before the war, advocated rapprochement with the Western powers. So, former ambassador The USSR in England I. Maisky in January 1944 submitted to Molotov a note “On the Desirable Foundations of the Future World”, which contained a proposal to divide Germany into several states. This idea was supported by the former People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, M. Litvinov, who at the end of 1944 presented to Stalin a project for the division of Germany into seven or at least three separate states.
During the period of the Yalta Conference, Stalin and Molotov seemed to be ready to share this point of view. At the same time, Western leaders were beginning to lean towards the idea of keeping Germany united. This change was explained by completely new military-political conditions.
At the end of 1943, the leaders of the United States and Britain counted on the fact that their troops would victoriously enter Berlin, when the Red Army was still only on the pre-war border of the USSR. And then the Western powers will become absolute masters of Central Europe. But the outstanding victories of the Soviet troops in 1944 and January 1945 changed everything dramatically.
By the beginning of the Yalta summit, our tanks were already just 60 km from Berlin. At the conference itself, the zones of occupation of Germany were outlined. And British government analysts feared that the division of Germany into several states could only "accelerate the inevitable trend of East Germany moving into the Soviet zone of influence, and this, consequently, would bring Soviet military power closer to the Western countries."
But the hesitation of the Soviet leadership was short-lived. On March 24, 1945, Molotov officially explained the Soviet proposal to study the question of a possible division of Germany into several states, not as a prerequisite, but as “a possible prospect for pressure on Germany in order to secure [in the sense - neutralize? - Ya.B.] it in case other means are insufficient.”
In an address to the Soviet people on Victory Day on May 9, 1945, Stalin specifically emphasized that the USSR "is not going to dismember or destroy Germany."
It's in in general terms coincided with the opinion that prevailed in government circles in the United States and England. But at the same time, each side sought to carry out the unification of Germany in its own way. Now, in anticipation of the clearly brewing " cold war”, each of its sides - the USSR and the English-speaking powers - tried to make Germany its ally.
The earliest such attempt was made by Churchill, and separately from the United States.
Until the end of May 1945, the last government of the Third Reich, headed by Grand Admiral Dönitz, was freely located in the zone of British occupation, and entire divisions of the Wehrmacht remained unarmed until the beginning of June - the British command left them weapons, not excluding their use in a possible war against the USSR.
But the American leadership then, before the test atomic bomb, was not yet ready to go to a confrontation with the USSR. At his own insistence, on July 1, 1945, the troops of the Western Allies were finally withdrawn to the dividing line established in Yalta (before that, since the end of hostilities, they had occupied a strip of more than 100-250 km wide in the Soviet zone of occupation).
And then the policy of the still formal allies began to show ever stronger divergences. This was especially true of the reorganization of Germany. Guided by the vague decisions of the Potsdam Conference (July 17 - August 2, 1945) on the denazification and democratization of Germany, the victorious countries interpreted these concepts in their zones of occupation in their own way.
In the Soviet zone, democratization and denazification implied large-scale socio-economic reforms. This was justified by the need to destroy the social base of German imperialism and militarism - the large Junker and Grossbauer landownership and private monopoly associations in industry. Agrarian reform and the nationalization of large enterprises, transport, communications and banks were launched. A solid democratic foundation was placed under these transformations: decisions on the expropriation of groups of enterprises were made in referendums in the states of East Germany (there were five plus Berlin) and approved by the Landtags elected on a multi-party basis in 1946. In the western zones, the transformations were limited to political reforms alone.
Contrary to popular legend, Stalin did not initially seek to reorganize East Germany, as well as the whole of Eastern Europe, according to the Soviet model.
All reforms in the countries of "people's democracy" and in the Soviet zone of occupation of Germany in 1945-1949. did not go beyond the bourgeois-democratic transformations. Being a pragmatist, Stalin was well aware that the preservation of the institutions of private property and multi-party democracy in these countries would contribute to the stability of the regimes there and would not require the USSR to spend energy and money on the reorganization of Eastern Europe. From the authorities of these states and from the East Germans, only one thing was required: complete loyalty to the Soviet Union in matters of foreign policy.
But the majority of non-communist parties in the countries of "people's democracy" turned out to be openly oriented towards the West and hostile to the USSR. Only under these conditions did Stalin have to take a course towards establishing a "managed democracy" in Eastern Europe and social reforms, which aimed to eliminate the class base of anti-Soviet sentiments. And even with all this, in most countries of Eastern Europe, the private sector in the economy remained and several political parties formally operated.
In East Germany, the socialist multi-party system flourished especially luxuriantly. An important transformation was the merger of the Communist and Social Democratic parties of Germany into the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED) in April 1946. From the name of the united Marxist-Leninist party, at the insistence of Stalin, the mention of communism was removed. It is significant how the occupation authorities of the Western powers reacted to this merger. Not only did they forbid the formation of SED organizations in West Germany, but they also prevented the communists from changing the name of the party.
In addition to the SED, four other parties were active in East Germany: the Christian Democratic Union (a party of the same name as in West Germany, but different in spirit), the Liberal Democratic Party, the National Democratic Party, and the Peasant Democratic Party. True, they had no real rivalry between themselves and with the SED.
The split in Germany was already marked in 1946, when it became clear that each side was pursuing its own economic policy. In December 1946, the American and British authorities made a separate decision to unite their occupation zones (the so-called Bizonia arose). This meant the free movement of capital, goods and people from one zone to another. In May 1947, the Economic Council for the Western Zones was established in Frankfurt am Main. In response to this, in July 1947, the German Economic Commission was established in East Germany. In April 1948, Trizonia arose - the French annexed their zone of occupation to the Americans and the British. In mid-June 1948, Trizonia carried out its own monetary reform (in the Soviet zone - at the end of this month). At the same time, the Landtags of the West German lands were asked to send their delegates to Bonn to draft a German constitution.
At the same time, both the USSR and the West invariably declared their desire to create a united democratic Germany.
However, in the context of the beginning of the Cold War, this was largely just propaganda rhetoric. And yet, as we shall see later, such statements contained more sincerity when they came from the Soviet side.
In 1947, the Minister-President of Bavaria invited his colleagues from all German states to hold a meeting at which it was planned to discuss the question of ways to restore the unity of the country. However, as it turned out, it was only about ways to overcome the economic disunity of the western and eastern occupation zones. When the minister-presidents of the East German states tried to discuss the creation of central government bodies for the whole of Germany, this came up against the rejection of their West German counterparts. Obviously, they already knew that the political reorganization of their lands would take place only at the behest of Washington and London and were not going to consider other possibilities.
On instructions from Moscow, the Central Committee of the SED launched a campaign for the democratic unification of Germany, covering the western zones as well. It was not only a propaganda action, as is commonly believed. The leaders of the SED and their patrons in the Kremlin seriously hoped to cause a wave popular movement in West Germany and carry out the unification of Germany against the plans of the Atlantic powers. The movement was institutionalized into the German People's Congress (the first was held in December 1947 in Berlin; in January 1948 the activities of the congress were banned in the western zones) and the German People's Council elected by it.
The Second German People's Congress (March 1948) decided to hold in May-June a collection of signatures in all parts of Germany for holding a referendum on the unity of the country. Despite the fact that the signature campaign was officially banned in Trizonia, 15 million Germans out of 38 million who had the right to vote signed up to demand a referendum. According to the constitution of Weimar Germany, the signatures of 10% of all voters were enough to hold a referendum.
Another powerful means of agitation was to be the draft constitution of the German Democratic Republic promulgated in October 1948. The left-wing groups tried to initiate its nationwide discussion in the western zones as well. On May 30, 1949, the Third German People's Congress adopted the constitution of the GDR, which entered into force on October 7, 1949.
Note that all dates are later than events similar in content took place in West Germany.
Obviously, West Germany, which had four times more economic power than East, was a very tasty morsel for the emerging North Atlantic bloc (created at the same time, in April 1949; the FRG joined it in 1955). That is why the leaders of the Western powers accelerated the process of recreating the institutions of German statehood, each time presenting the Soviet Union with a fait accompli. The USSR simply had no other choice but to create an ally for itself, in the form of a legitimate state, in its zone of occupation.
The only alternative left to us by the West was to agree to the unification of Germany on its terms, that is, to give NATO also East Germany. Gorbachev could agree to this, but not Stalin.
Exactly insofar as the creation of a separate state in West Germany was in the interests of the United States and England, insofar as the creation of a separate state in East Germany did not meet the interests of the USSR. In the light of this indisputable fact, Stalin's sincere, and not feigned, desire to see Germany as a united but neutral country during his lifetime becomes understandable.
Much more important than creating a pro-Soviet state in a smaller part of Germany, for Stalin it was to deprive the English-speaking powers of the undivided possession of West Germany.
At the same time, Stalin understood that such an unification could only occur as a result of concessions from the Anglo-American bloc, and therefore he himself could not but be ready to make some concessions. In particular, it was impossible to extend to a united Germany the socio-political model that had developed in the Soviet zone of occupation. In a united Germany, a real, and not a fictitious, multi-party system, large private property, and other attributes of the bourgeois system would be inevitable. But the price for all this was to be the non-bloc and demilitarized status of Germany.
The fact that such a scenario was real is shown by the example of the post-war structure of countries such as Austria and Finland. In May 1955, the victorious powers signed an agreement on the restoration of the unity and sovereignty of Austria and on the withdrawal of the occupation troops from there. This agreement was reached when Khrushchev had already become the real ruler of the USSR, but the loyal Stalinite Molotov still remained the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who prepared all this. Formally neutral Finland was in special relations with the USSR. The Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, concluded in 1948 and regularly extended, actually consolidated the allied relations between the two countries. At the same time, since 1973, capitalist Finland has also been in special economic relations with the CMEA.
Thus, bourgeois-democratic Austria and Finland were neutral buffer states between the Soviet bloc and NATO. It was the embodiment of the post-war Stalinist geopolitical plan, which, unfortunately, was realized only fragmentarily. To complete it, the main thing was missing - for a single demilitarized Germany to become such a buffer state.
At the same time, one should not go to the other extreme and negatively assess the significance of the 1949 constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany in the post-war arrangement of the center of Europe. The current German Basic Law, which is now 60 years old, is rightfully considered one of the most democratic constitutions in the world. modern world. He laid the political and legal foundations for a new Germany free from Nazism and aggressive aspirations.
Special for the Centenary
It is quite understandable that during the war, any country that participates in it hopes to win it.
But not in every war throughout the history of Modern and Contemporary times
it was about the destruction of the defeated state. Most often, peace treaties provided for some annexation
parts of the territory of the defeated in favor of the winner, as well as indemnity
, which the winner could count on receiving only on the condition that it would be paid to someone.
Although, of course, there were exceptions. For example, sections of the Commonwealth in the 18th century
, as a result of which this Polish-Lithuanian state, formed by the Union of Lublin in 1569 by the union of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland, was gradually liquidated by its neighbors Prussia, Austria and Russia.
Another thing, 20th century wars .
According to the results World War I the political map of the world (and especially Europe) has become completely different from the one on which the state borders as of June 28, 1914. The Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empire, German - lost significant parts of its territory (about 20%, not counting the colonies). Russia, most likely, was expected by the fate of Turkey or Austria-Hungary, but it quickly managed to recover, albeit under a different name - the USSR.
The Second World War was a logical continuation of the world massacre that preceded it at the beginning of the 20th century, but only more cruel and aimed at the partial or complete destruction of the states that converged in it. It does not make much sense to talk about Hitler's plans for the global redistribution of Europe and the whole world, they are widely known. In addition, in the period 1938 - 1941. they were quite successfully implemented: the sovereign statehood of all countries subjected to German occupation was completely liquidated, and the satellites of the Third Reich can hardly be called completely sovereign.
well and Germany's war with the Soviet Union , which began on June 22, 1941, was carried out for the complete destruction of its statehood and the dismemberment of its territory without any potential granting of independence to any of its parts (See: plan "Ost").
Of course, during the Second World War, the countries Anti-Hitler coalition who became allies contrary to their political aspirations, due to the current political situation (which became such largely through their fault (not forgetting the notorious "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact" of 1939, it is worth recalling the Munich Agreement of 1938, which unleashed Hitler hands), even in the most difficult years of the war, they had to think about how to protect the world from the possibility of a repetition of aggression from the main enemy - Germany.
And, of course, first of all, these thoughts were aimed at destroying Germany as a single state and preventing her from starting a new war.
Plans for the division of Germany allies in the Anti-Hitler coalition began to develop more spring 1942 when the Victory was still very far away.
But before considering these projects, I propose to recall how it was divided defeated Germany in 1945 according to the decisions Yalta Conference (February 1945) , at which the final decision was made on the occupation of Germany and the delimitation of the occupation zones, which ultimately led to its division in 1949 into the FRG and the GDR (as well as West Berlin).
Partition of Germany in 1945:
(An incomprehensible flag on this map indicates the Saar region of Germany,
It was a protectorate of France from 1947 to 1956).
If it seems to you that Germany was treated too cruelly in 1945, then I advise you to go under the cut and read what were the plans proposed and considered by the allies in the Anti-Hitler coalition, preceding the final plan adopted at the Yalta Conference and finally approved in Potsdam.
The first (or at least one of the first) plan for the dismemberment of Germany after the war was developed and proposed by the US Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles
in the spring of 1942, after the United States was drawn into the Second world war, became allies of the USSR, and also after it became clear that Hitler's plan to quickly conquer the USSR ("Barbarossa") failed, which became obvious during the counteroffensive of the Red Army near Moscow in December 1941 - February 1942, and that without the USSR, the Americans there is no way to win a war with Germany's ally Japan.
Sumner Welles
Sumner Welles plan provided for the division of Germany into three states in accordance with historical and religious borders: Southwestern Germany (Bavaria and Hesse) with a predominance of the Catholic population, Northern Germany (Hanover and Westphalia) and East Germany (Prussia and Saxony), in which Catholics predominate.
However, the entire area East Prussia was to go to Poland.
On Tehran conference On December 1, 1943, two completely different plans for the division of Germany were proposed U.S. President F. D. Roosevelt And British Prime Minister W. Churchill.
Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at the Tehran Conference
Roosevelt's plan Germany was to be divided into five states: the Republic of Hanover, the Republic of Hesse, the Republic of Bavaria, the Republic of Saxony and the Republic of Prussia. East Prussia, again, was to go completely to Poland.
Churchill suggested transfer to Poland not only all of East Prussia, but also a significant part of Silesia, dividing Germany into Northern (of course, under the control of England), Western (Westphalia), which was also supposed to be under vigilant control from London. And most of southern Germany (Bavaria and Hesse) should be united with Austria and Hungary into a kind of "Danube Confederation".
At the Tehran conference Stalin
categorically opposed the plans of his allies, especially about the idea of Churchill to form a confederation of the Danube states. But at the same time, he agreed with the need to separate East Prussia from Germany, however, dividing it between Poland and the USSR.
Stalin also made a proposal regarding the post-war borders of Poland, which provided for compensating Poland for the loss of its eastern provinces that became part of the USSR (Ukrainian SSR and BSSR) in 1939 at the expense of Germany defeated in the future. This proposal by Stalin, like his idea of a border between Poland and the USSR in accordance with the so-called "Curzon line"
, was taken.
Stalin's position was so weighty that even in G. Morgenthau's plan, the transfer of the northern part of East Prussia to the Soviet Union was taken into account. However, about U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau's plan to partition Germany worth a little more detail.
Henry Morgenthau
This plan was approved in September 1944 at the 2nd Anglo-American Conference (without the participation of the USSR) in Quebec, Canada.
According to him, Germany was to be destroyed almost completely. In its place, two Germanys were formed: North (Hanover, Mecklenburg, Saxony and Thuringia) and South (Bavaria and Württemberg). The entire western part of Germany (Oldenburg, Westphalia and Schleswig-Holstein) was transferred under international control (as was the case after the First World War, when the Rhine demilitarized zone was formed by the decisions of the Versailles Conference), the Saar passed to France, and all of Upper Silesia and most of Eastern Prussia - Poland.
But besides this, according to the Morgenthau plan, it was supposed to deprive even dismembered Germany of all heavy industry and turn it into an agrarian country.
Despite the fact that the Morgenthau Plan was ultimately rejected, the actions of the British and American administrations in the occupation zones after 1945 are quite consistent with its most important points (except for territorial ones).
Thus, we can conclude that the decisions of the Yalta Conference, which decided the fate of post-war Germany, were the most lenient in relation to the defeated enemy, when compared with those proposed by Welles in 1942, Roosevelt and Churchill in 1943 and Morgenthau in 1944
Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin at Yalta (January 1945)
Of course, over the course of 45 years, Germany was divided: first into four occupation zones (by the way, I still don’t understand for what such merits France received its own zone and an increase in territory at the expense of Germany? However, this is a separate issue), and then - from 1949 to 1990 - into two (and if we count West Berlin, then three) separate states.
The question of whether the unification of Germany in 1990 would have been possible without the good will of the USSR is, although debatable, but very interesting, especially if we recall that the very same England opposed this unification.
But what is undoubted, in my opinion, is that if in 1945 not the plan adopted in Yalta, but any of those projects that were proposed by the USA and England in 1942 - 1944, were implemented, modern united Germany would not exist. still.
And finally, let me explain why I am interested in this topic
.
The fact is that, taking into account mutually beneficial geopolitical interests, I consider Russia and Germany natural allies
in modern world. They have been such since the middle of the 19th century (especially after the unified German Empire was formed). And the roots of two global catastrophes- world wars 1914 - 1918 and 1939 - 1945 should be sought in the causes of the collapse "Union of the Three Emperors"
, after which the formation of two opposing military-political blocs began - the Triple Alliance and the Entente. Well, then followed what is quite appropriate to call a chain reaction.
I would very much like to hope that the need for an alliance between Russia and Germany will be recognized by both countries in the very near future.
Thank you for attention.
Sergei Vorobyov.
After the war, Germany lay in ruins. The industry was destroyed, products were issued on cards. But in 1948 a “miracle” happened. Factories began to open, goods appeared on the shelves, and the German mark became the most desired currency in the world.
Let's find out how, in just a few years, Germany has again become one of the leading powers in the world.
Marshall Plan
First post-war years in Germany they were called "zero". As the "father" later wrote German miracle– Ludwig Erhard: “There was a time when we in Germany were doing calculations, according to which there was one plate every five years, a pair of shoes every twelve years, one suit every fifty years.”
The well-known "Marshall Plan" was the first step towards Germany's exit from this crisis.
In addition to preparing the ground for the ensuing Cold War, he had clear economic objectives. Western Europe has always been the most important market for American capitalism. Even during the Great Depression, the United States was able to get out of the crisis by conquering the European market.
The "mechanism" is simple - the greater the demand in Europe, the greater the supply from the United States, the more jobs there, the higher the purchasing power of American citizens.
In the post-war period, Europe needed American goods more than ever. There was only one problem - there was nothing to buy them, national currencies depreciated. Therefore, in 1947, the United States found itself at a crossroads - either to abandon promising markets and slow down the growth of its own economy, or to provide material support to post-war Europe and receive not only a "regular customer and client", but also an ally. The United States put on the second and did not lose.
In accordance with the Marshall Plan, Germany was provided with a total of $3.12 billion in loans, equipment and technology over 4 years. And although the "plan" was not the main active force in the post-war reconstruction of Germany, it made it possible to carry out later what will be called the "German miracle." In a few years, the production of both agricultural and industrial products will exceed the pre-war level.
"Prosperity for all"
The main creator of the "new Germany" was not the American Secretary of State, but the first Minister of Economics of the Federal Republic of Germany, later the Federal Chancellor - Ludwig Erhard. Erhard's main concept was contained in the postulate that the economy is not a soulless mechanism, it rests on living people with their desires, aspirations and needs.
Thus, the basis for the economic revival of Germany was to be free enterprise. Erhard wrote: “I see the ideal situation where a common person can say: I have enough strength to stand up for myself, I want to be responsible for my own destiny. You, the state, do not worry about my affairs, but give me so much freedom and leave me so much from the result of my work that I myself and at my own discretion provide for the existence of myself and my family.
In Erhard's policy, the state was assigned the role of a "night guard", which "protected" entrepreneurial activity from monopoly, external competition, high taxes and other factors that stood in the way of the liberal market.
The introduction of a free market economy in post-war Germany was not simple solution. It was Erhard's only initiative, an "anti-law", which contradicted the policy of the occupying authorities and nullified all previous attempts to pull Germany out of the crisis through a planned economy and state regulation.
And it worked. Some time later, two Frenchmen Jacques Rueff and Andre Pietre, who were in Germany at that time, wrote: “Only eyewitnesses can tell about the instantaneous effect that the currency reform had on filling warehouses and richness of shop windows. From day to day, shops began to be filled with goods and factories resumed work. The day before, hopelessness was written on the faces of the Germans, the next day the whole nation looked to the future with hope.
New brand
But free enterprise needed one more thing. important condition- currency stability. In the post-war period, the Reichsmark was valued no more than once the "Kerenki" in the RSFSR.
On June 21, 1948, a monetary reform was carried out, aimed at the confiscation of depreciated money and the creation of a hard currency. This is how the Deutschmark appeared, which later became famous as one of the most stable currencies of the 20th century.
The monetary reform was prepared in the strictest secrecy. Firstly, in order not to provoke the intervention of the USSR, and secondly, in order to avoid panic getting rid of the old Reichsmarks.
But on the eve of the reform, rumors still leaked to the masses, causing a real "shopping hysteria" - the Germans tried to buy everything that money could still buy. As a result, black market prices have shot up to astronomical heights.
The exchange rate of the old currency for the new one was purely confiscatory. Firstly, for 10 old marks they gave one new one, with the same paying capacity. Secondly, each adult could change on June 21 at a time only 400 Reichsmarks for 40 Deutschmarks, and then another 200 Reichsmarks for new 20 within a few days. At the end of the term, all remaining Reichsmarks were either partially kept in banks or depreciated.
Through such tough measures, Erhard managed to ensure a stable exchange rate for the new currency, as well as achieve an even distribution of funds between different segments of the population, while before that most of the country's currency was concentrated in the hands of a small but very wealthy group of people. Now a broad and stable middle class was emerging.
In the 50s, the German mark became one of the most reliable currencies in the world, in which residents of many countries kept their savings. Even when DM in 1977 was almost half its value in 1950, its purchasing power remained among the best in the world.
Freedom to prices!
Literally a few days after the monetary reform, prices were "set free". From now on, the pricing policy was based on the principle of liberalization, with only one proviso that the state retained the right of partial control over them. So he compiled a list of "appropriate prices" for certain consumer products, and also adopted a ban on arbitrary price increases in order to avoid the greed of entrepreneurs.
It was followed by antitrust decrees, according to which the share of one company in the market could not exceed 33%, two or three - 50%, and four or five - no more than 65%.
Tax incentives were introduced, which discouraged companies from the "shadow business". In short, numbers speak louder than words. By 1950, Germany had reached the pre-war level of production, and by 1962 it was three times higher.
Once, after the recovery of the German economy, its entry into the first positions of the world market, Erhard was asked what is the key to the successful development of the economy. To this he replied: "the resourcefulness of the entrepreneurs, the discipline and diligence of the workers, and the skillful policy of the government."
