In the early morning of September 1, 1939, German troops invaded Poland. Goebbels propaganda presented this event as a response to the “capture by Polish soldiers” of a radio station in the German border town of Gleiwitz that had occurred the day before (later it turned out that the German security service organized the staging of the attack in Gleiwitz, using German suicide prisoners dressed in Polish military uniforms). Germany sent 57 divisions against Poland.

Great Britain and France, connected with Poland by allied obligations, after some hesitation, declared war on Germany on September 3. But the opponents were in no hurry to get involved in an active struggle. According to Hitler's instructions, the German troops during this period were to adhere to defensive tactics on the Western Front in order to "sparing their forces as much as possible, create the prerequisites for the successful completion of the operation against Poland." The Western powers did not launch an offensive either. 110 French and 5 British divisions stood against 23 German divisions without taking any serious action. It is no coincidence that this confrontation was called the "strange war."

Left without help, Poland, despite the desperate resistance of its soldiers and officers to the invaders in Gdansk (Danzig), on the Baltic coast in the Westerplatte region, in Silesia and other places, could not hold back the onslaught of the German armies.

On September 6, the Germans approached Warsaw. The Polish government and the diplomatic corps left the capital. But the remnants of the garrison and the population defended the city until the end of September. The defense of Warsaw became one of the heroic pages in the history of the struggle against the invaders.

In the midst of the tragic events for Poland on September 17, 1939, units of the Red Army crossed the Soviet-Polish border and occupied the border territories. In connection with this, the Soviet note said that they "took under protection the lives and property of the population of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus." On September 28, 1939, Germany and the USSR, which practically divided the territory of Poland, concluded a friendship and border treaty. In a statement on the occasion, the representatives of the two countries stressed that "thus creating a solid foundation for lasting peace in Eastern Europe." Having thus secured new frontiers in the east, Hitler turned to the west.

On April 9, 1940, German troops invaded Denmark and Norway. On May 10, they crossed the borders of Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg and launched an offensive against France. The balance of power was about equal. But the German shock armies, with their strong tank formations and aircraft, managed to break through the Allied front. Part of the defeated Allied troops retreated to the English Channel coast. Their remnants were evacuated from Dunkirk in early June. By mid-June, the Germans captured the northern part of French territory.

The French government declared Paris an "open city". On June 14, he was surrendered to the Germans without a fight. The hero of the First World War, 84-year-old Marshal A.F. Petain, spoke on the radio with an appeal to the French: “With pain in my heart, I tell you today that we must stop the fight. Tonight I turned to the enemy in order to ask him if he is ready to seek with me ... means to end hostilities. However, not all Frenchmen supported this position. On June 18, 1940, in a broadcast of the London BBC radio station, General Charles de Gaulle stated:

“Has the last word been said? Is there no more hope? Has the final defeat been dealt? No! France is not alone! ... This war is not limited to the long-suffering territory of our country. The outcome of this war is not decided by the battle for France. This World War... I, General de Gaulle, who is currently in London, appeal to the French officers and soldiers who are on British territory ... with an appeal to establish contact with me ... Whatever happens, the flame of French resistance must not go out and will not go out.

On June 22, 1940, in the Compiègne forest (in the same place and in the same carriage as in 1918), the Franco-German truce was concluded, this time meaning the defeat of France. On the remaining unoccupied territory of France, a government headed by A.F. Petain was created, which expressed its readiness to cooperate with the German authorities (it was located in the small town of Vichy). On the same day, Charles de Gaulle announced the creation of the "Free France" committee, the purpose of which is to organize the struggle against the invaders.

After the surrender of France, Germany invited Britain to start peace negotiations. The British government, headed at that moment by a supporter of decisive anti-German actions, W. Churchill, refused. In response, Germany strengthened the naval blockade of the British Isles, and massive German bomber raids began on British cities. Great Britain, for its part, signed in September 1940 an agreement with the United States on the transfer of several dozen American warships to the British fleet. Germany failed to achieve its intended goals in the "Battle of Britain".

Back in the summer of 1940, the strategic direction of further actions was determined in the leading circles of Germany. The chief of the general staff, F. Halder, then wrote in his official diary: "The eyes are turned to the East." Hitler at one of the military meetings said: “Russia must be liquidated. Deadline - spring 1941.

Preparing to carry out this task, Germany was interested in expanding and strengthening the anti-Soviet coalition. In September 1940, Germany, Italy and Japan signed a military-political alliance for a period of 10 years - the Tripartite Pact. Soon Hungary, Romania and the self-proclaimed Slovak state joined it, and a few months later - Bulgaria. A German-Finnish agreement on military cooperation was also concluded. Where it was not possible to establish an alliance on a contractual basis, they acted by force. In October 1940, Italy attacked Greece. In April 1941, German troops occupied Yugoslavia and Greece. Croatia became a separate state - a satellite of Germany. By the summer of 1941, almost all of Central and Western Europe was under the rule of Germany and its allies.

1941

In December 1940, Hitler approved the Barbarossa plan, which provided for the defeat of the Soviet Union. It was a blitzkrieg (blitzkrieg) plan. Three army groups - "North", "Center" and "South" were supposed to break through the Soviet front and capture vital centers: the Baltic states and Leningrad, Moscow, Ukraine, Donbass. The breakthrough was provided by the forces of powerful tank formations and aviation. Before the onset of winter, it was supposed to reach the line Arkhangelsk - Volga - Astrakhan.

On June 22, 1941, the armies of Germany and its allies attacked the USSR. A new phase of the Second World War began. Its main front was the Soviet-German front, the most important component being the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet people against the invaders. First of all, these are the battles that thwarted the German plan for a lightning war. Many battles can be named among them - from the desperate resistance of the border guards, the battle of Smolensk to the defense of Kyiv, Odessa, Sevastopol, besieged, but never surrendered Leningrad.

The largest event not only of military but also of political significance was the Battle of Moscow. The offensives of the German Army Group Center, launched on September 30 and November 15-16, 1941, did not achieve their goal. Moscow failed to take. And on December 5-6, the counteroffensive of the Soviet troops began, as a result of which the enemy was thrown back from the capital by 100-250 km, 38 German divisions were defeated. The victory of the Red Army near Moscow became possible thanks to the steadfastness and heroism of its defenders and the skill of its generals (the fronts were commanded by I. S. Konev, G. K. Zhukov, and S. K. Timoshenko). It was the first major German defeat in World War II. W. Churchill stated in this regard: "The resistance of the Russians broke the back of the German armies."

The balance of forces at the beginning of the counteroffensive of Soviet troops in Moscow

Important events took place at this time in pacific ocean. Back in the summer and autumn of 1940, Japan, taking advantage of the defeat of France, seized its possessions in Indochina. Now it has decided to strike at the strongholds of other Western powers, primarily its main rival in the struggle for influence in Southeast Asia - the United States. On December 7, 1941, more than 350 Japanese naval aircraft attacked the US naval base at Pearl Harbor (in the Hawaiian Islands).

In two hours, most of the warships and aircraft of the American Pacific Fleet were destroyed or disabled, the death toll of Americans amounted to more than 2,400 people, and more than 1,100 people were wounded. The Japanese lost several dozen people. The next day, the US Congress decided to start a war against Japan. Three days later, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States.

The defeat of the German troops near Moscow and the entry into the war of the United States of America accelerated the formation of the anti-Hitler coalition.

Dates and events

• July 12, 1941- signing of the Anglo-Soviet agreement on joint actions against Germany.
• August 14- F. Roosevelt and W. Churchill issued a joint declaration on the aims of the war, support for democratic principles in international relations - the Atlantic Charter; in September the USSR joined it.
• September 29 - October 1- British-American-Soviet conference in Moscow, adopted a program of mutual deliveries of weapons, military materials and raw materials.
• November 7- the law on lend-lease (the transfer by the United States of America of weapons and other materials to the enemies of Germany) was extended to the USSR.
• January 1, 1942- in Washington, the Declaration of 26 states - "united nations", leading the fight against the fascist bloc, was signed.

On the fronts of the world war

War in Africa. Back in 1940, the war went beyond Europe. This summer, Italy, seeking to make the Mediterranean its "inland sea", tried to seize the British colonies in North Africa. Italian troops occupied British Somalia, parts of Kenya and Sudan, and then invaded Egypt. However, by the spring of 1941, the British armed forces not only drove the Italians out of the territories they had occupied, but also entered Ethiopia, occupied by Italy in 1935. Italian possessions in Libya were also under threat.

At the request of Italy, Germany intervened in the hostilities in North Africa. In the spring of 1941, the German corps under the command of General E. Rommel, together with the Italians, began to oust the British from Libya and blockaded the fortress of Tobruk. Then Egypt became the target of the offensive of the German-Italian troops. In the summer of 1942, General Rommel, nicknamed the "desert fox", captured Tobruk and broke through with his troops to El Alamein.

The Western powers were faced with a choice. They promised the leadership of the Soviet Union to open a second front in Europe in 1942. In April 1942, F. Roosevelt wrote to W. Churchill: “Your and my peoples demand the creation of a second front in order to remove the burden from the Russians. Our peoples cannot fail to see that the Russians are killing more Germans and destroying more enemy equipment than the United States and Britain combined." But these promises were at odds with the political interests of Western countries. Churchill telegraphed Roosevelt: "Keep North Africa out of sight." The Allies announced that the opening of a second front in Europe had to be postponed until 1943.

In October 1942, British troops under the command of General B. Montgomery launched an offensive in Egypt. They defeated the enemy near El Alamein (about 10 thousand Germans and 20 thousand Italians were captured). Most of Rommel's army retreated to Tunisia. In November, American and British troops (numbering 110 thousand people) under the command of General D. Eisenhower landed in Morocco and Algeria. The German-Italian army group, squeezed in Tunisia by British and American troops advancing from the east and west, capitulated in the spring of 1943. According to various estimates, from 130 thousand to 252 thousand people were taken prisoner (in total, 12-14 fought in North Africa Italian and German divisions, while over 200 divisions of Germany and its allies fought on the Soviet-German front).

Fighting in the Pacific. In the summer of 1942, the American naval forces defeated the Japanese in the battle near Midway Island (4 large aircraft carriers, 1 cruiser were sunk, 332 aircraft were destroyed). Later, American units occupied and defended the island of Guadalcanal. The balance of power in this area of ​​hostilities changed in favor of the Western powers. By the end of 1942, Germany and its allies were forced to suspend the advance of their troops on all fronts.

"New order"

In the Nazi plans for the conquest of the world, the fate of many peoples and states was predetermined.

Hitler in his secret notes, which became known after the war, provided for the following: the Soviet Union "will disappear from the face of the earth", in 30 years its territory will become part of the "Great German Reich"; after the "final victory of Germany" there will be reconciliation with England, a treaty of friendship will be concluded with her; the Reich will include the countries of Scandinavia, the Iberian Peninsula and other European states; The United States of America will be “excluded from world politics for a long time”, they will undergo a “complete re-education of the racially inferior population”, and the population “with German blood” will be given military training and "re-education in the national spirit", after which America "becomes a German state."

As early as 1940, directives and instructions "on the Eastern question" began to be developed, and a comprehensive program for the conquest of the peoples of Eastern Europe was outlined in the "Ost" general plan (December 1941). The general guidelines were as follows: “The highest goal of all activities carried out in the East should be to strengthen the military potential of the Reich. The task is to withdraw from the new eastern regions the greatest amount of agricultural products, raw materials, labor power", "the occupied regions will provide everything necessary ... even if the consequence of this will be the starvation of millions of people." Part of the population of the occupied territories was to be destroyed on the spot, a significant part was to be resettled in Siberia (it was planned to destroy 5-6 million Jews in the "eastern regions", evict 46-51 million people, and reduce the remaining 14 million people to the level of a semi-literate workforce, education limit to a four-grade school).

In the conquered countries of Europe, the Nazis methodically put their plans into practice. In the occupied territories, a "cleansing" of the population was carried out - Jews and communists were exterminated. Prisoners of war and part of the civilian population were sent to concentration camps. A network of more than 30 death camps has entangled Europe. The terrible memory of millions of tortured people is associated among the war and post-war generations with the names Buchenwald, Dachau, Ravensbrück, Auschwitz, Treblinka and others. Only in two of them - Auschwitz and Majdanek - more than 5.5 million people were killed. Those who arrived at the camp underwent a “selection” (selection), the weak, primarily the elderly and children, were sent to the gas chambers, and then burned in the ovens of crematoria.

From the testimony of a French prisoner in Auschwitz, Vaillant-Couturier, presented at the Nuremberg trials:

“There were eight cremators in Auschwitz. But since 1944 this amount has become insufficient. The SS men forced the prisoners to dig colossal ditches in which they set fire to firewood doused with gasoline. The bodies were dumped into these ditches. We saw from our block how, about 45 minutes or an hour after the arrival of a batch of prisoners, large flames began to escape from the crematorium ovens, and a glow appeared in the sky, rising above the moats. One night we were awakened by a terrible scream, and the next morning we learned from people who worked in the Sonderkommando (the team that serviced the gas chambers) that the day before there was not enough gas and therefore still alive children were thrown into the furnaces of cremation ovens.

At the beginning of 1942, the Nazi leaders adopted a directive on the "final solution of the Jewish question", that is, on the planned destruction of an entire people. During the war years, 6 million Jews were killed - one in three. This tragedy was called the Holocaust, which means "burnt offering" in Greek. The orders of the German command to identify and transport the Jewish population to concentration camps were perceived differently in the occupied countries of Europe. In France, the Vichy police helped the Germans. Even the Pope did not dare to condemn the Germans in 1943, the removal of Jews from Italy for subsequent extermination. And in Denmark, the population hid the Jews from the Nazis and helped 8 thousand people to move to neutral Sweden. Already after the war, an alley was laid in Jerusalem in honor of the Righteous Among the Nations - people who risked their lives and the lives of their loved ones in order to save at least one innocent person sentenced to imprisonment and death.

For residents of the occupied countries who were not immediately destroyed or deported, the “new order” meant strict regulation in all spheres of life. The occupation authorities and the German industrialists seized the dominant positions in the economy with the help of laws on "Aryanization". Small enterprises were closed, and large ones switched to military production. Part of the agricultural areas were subject to Germanization, their population was forcibly evicted to other areas. So, about 450 thousand inhabitants were evicted from the territories of the Czech Republic bordering on Germany, about 280 thousand people were evicted from Slovenia. Compulsory deliveries of agricultural products were introduced for peasants. Along with control over economic activity, the new authorities pursued a policy of restrictions in the field of education and culture. In many countries, representatives of the intelligentsia - scientists, engineers, teachers, doctors, etc. - were persecuted. In Poland, for example, the Nazis carried out a targeted curtailment of the education system. Classes in universities and high schools were banned. (What do you think, why, for what purpose was this done?) Some teachers, risking their lives, continued to conduct classes with students illegally. During the war years, the invaders destroyed about 12.5 thousand teachers of higher education in Poland. educational institutions and teachers.

A tough policy towards the population was also pursued by the authorities of the states - allies of Germany - Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, as well as the newly proclaimed states - Croatia and Slovakia. In Croatia, the government of the Ustashe (participants of the nationalist movement that came to power in 1941), under the slogan of creating a "purely national state", encouraged the mass expulsion and extermination of Serbs.

The forced export of the able-bodied population, primarily young people, from the occupied countries of Eastern Europe to work in Germany took on a wide scale. Commissioner General "for the use of labor" Sauckel set the task of "completely exhausting all available human resources in the Soviet regions." Echelons with thousands of young men and women forcibly driven from their homes were drawn to the Reich. By the end of 1942, the labor of about 7 million "Eastern workers" and prisoners of war was used in German industry and agriculture. In 1943, another 2 million people were added to them.

Any disobedience, and even more so resistance to the occupying authorities, was mercilessly punished. One of the terrible examples of the massacre of the Nazis over the civilian population was the destruction in the summer of 1942 of the Czech village of Lidice. It was carried out as an "act of retaliation" for the murder of a major Nazi official, the "protector of Bohemia and Moravia" G. Heydrich, committed by members of a sabotage group the day before.

The village was surrounded by German soldiers. The entire male population over 16 years old (172 people) was shot (the residents who were absent that day - 19 people - were seized later and also shot). 195 women were sent to the Ravensbrück concentration camp (four pregnant women were taken to maternity hospitals in Prague, after giving birth they were also sent to the camp, and newborn children were killed). 90 children from Lidice were taken from their mothers and sent to Poland, and then to Germany, where their traces were lost. All the houses and buildings of the village were burned to the ground. Lidice disappeared from the face of the earth. German cameramen carefully filmed the entire "operation" on film - "as a warning" to contemporaries and descendants.

Break in the war

By mid-1942, it became clear that Germany and its allies had failed to carry out their original military plans on any of the fronts. In subsequent hostilities, it was to be decided on whose side the advantage would be. The outcome of the entire war depended mainly on events in Europe, on the Soviet-German front. In the summer of 1942, the German armies launched a major offensive in the southern direction, approached Stalingrad and reached the foothills of the Caucasus.

Battles for Stalingrad lasted over 3 months. The city was defended by the 62nd and 64th armies under the command of V.I. Chuikov and M.S. Shumilov. Hitler, who did not doubt victory, declared: "Stalingrad is already in our hands." But the counteroffensive of the Soviet troops that began on November 19, 1942 (front commanders - N.F. Vatutin, K.K. Rokossovsky, A.I. Eremenko) ended with the encirclement of the German armies (numbering over 300 thousand people), their subsequent defeat and capture , including Commander Field Marshal F. Paulus.

During the Soviet offensive, the losses of the armies of Germany and its allies amounted to 800 thousand people. In total, in the Battle of Stalingrad, they lost up to 1.5 million soldiers and officers - about a quarter of the forces that were then operating on the Soviet-German front.

Battle of Kursk. In the summer of 1943, an attempt by the German offensive on Kursk from the Orel and Belgorod regions ended in a crushing defeat. From the German side, more than 50 divisions (including 16 tank and motorized) participated in the operation. A special role was assigned to powerful artillery and tank strikes. On July 12, the largest tank battle of the Second World War took place on the field near the village of Prokhorovka, in which about 1,200 tanks and self-propelled artillery mounts collided. In early August, Soviet troops liberated Orel and Belgorod. 30 enemy divisions were defeated. The losses of the German army in this battle amounted to 500 thousand soldiers and officers, 1.5 thousand tanks. After the Battle of Kursk, the offensive of the Soviet troops began along the entire front. In the summer and autumn of 1943, Smolensk, Gomel, Left-bank Ukraine and Kyiv were liberated. The strategic initiative on the Soviet-German front passed to the Red Army.

In the summer of 1943, the Western powers began hostilities in Europe as well. But they did not open, as expected, a second front against Germany, but struck in the south, against Italy. In July, British-American troops landed on the island of Sicily. Soon there was a coup d'état in Italy. Representatives of the army elite removed from power and arrested Mussolini. A new government was created, headed by Marshal P. Badoglio. On September 3, it concluded an armistice agreement with the British-American command. On September 8, the surrender of Italy was announced, the troops of the Western powers landed in the south of the country. In response, 10 German divisions entered Italy from the north and captured Rome. On the formed Italian front, the British-American troops with difficulty, slowly, but still pressed the enemy (in the summer of 1944 they occupied Rome).

The turning point in the course of the war immediately affected the positions of other countries - Germany's allies. After the Battle of Stalingrad, representatives of Romania and Hungary began to explore the possibility of concluding a separate (separate) peace with the Western powers. The Francoist government of Spain issued statements of neutrality.

On November 28 - December 1, 1943, a meeting of the leaders of the three countries took place in Tehran- members of the anti-Hitler coalition: the USSR, the USA and Great Britain. I. Stalin, F. Roosevelt and W. Churchill discussed mainly the question of the second front, as well as some questions of the organization of the post-war world. The leaders of the United States and Great Britain promised to open a second front in Europe in May 1944, starting the landing of allied troops in France.

Resistance movement

Since the establishment of the Nazi regime in Germany, and then the occupation regimes in Europe, a movement of resistance to the "new order" began. It was attended by people of different beliefs and political affiliations: communists, social democrats, supporters of bourgeois parties and non-party people. Among the first, even in the pre-war years, the German anti-fascists entered the struggle. Thus, in the late 1930s, an underground anti-Nazi group arose in Germany, headed by X. Schulze-Boysen and A. Harnack. In the early 1940s, it was already a strong organization with an extensive network of conspiratorial groups (in total, up to 600 people participated in its work). Underground workers carried out propaganda and intelligence work, keeping in touch with Soviet intelligence. In the summer of 1942, the Gestapo uncovered the organization. The scale of its activities amazed the investigators themselves, who called this group the "Red Chapel". After interrogation and torture, the leaders and many members of the group were sentenced to death. In his last word at the trial, X. Schulze-Boysen said: "Today you judge us, but tomorrow we will be the judges."

In a number of European countries, immediately after their occupation, an armed struggle began against the invaders. In Yugoslavia, the communists became the initiators of the popular resistance to the enemy. Already in the summer of 1941, they created the Main Headquarters of the People's Liberation Partisan Detachments (it was headed by I. Broz Tito) and decided on an armed uprising. By the autumn of 1941, partisan detachments numbering up to 70 thousand people were operating in Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 1942, the People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia (NOLA) was created, by the end of the year it practically controlled a fifth of the country's territory. In the same year, representatives of organizations participating in the Resistance formed the Anti-Fascist Council for the People's Liberation of Yugoslavia (AVNOYU). In November 1943, the veche proclaimed itself the temporary supreme body of legislative and executive power. By this time, half of the country's territory was under his control. A declaration was adopted that determined the foundations of the new Yugoslav state. National committees were created on the liberated territory, the confiscation of enterprises and lands of fascists and collaborators (people who collaborated with the invaders) began.

The resistance movement in Poland consisted of many different groups in their political orientations. In February 1942, part of the underground armed formations merged into the Craiova Army (AK), led by representatives of the Polish government in exile, which was in London. "Peasant battalions" were created in the villages. The detachments of the People's Army (AL), organized by the communists, began to operate.

Partisan groups staged sabotage on transport (over 1,200 military trains were blown up and about the same number set on fire), at military enterprises, and attacked police and gendarmerie stations. Underground workers issued leaflets telling about the situation on the fronts, warning the population about the actions of the occupation authorities. In 1943-1944. partisan groups began to unite into large detachments that successfully fought against significant enemy forces, and as the Soviet-German front approached Poland, they interacted with Soviet partisan detachments and army units, and carried out joint military operations.

The defeat of the armies of Germany and its allies at Stalingrad had a special impact on the mood of people in the warring and occupied countries. The German security service reported on the "state of mind" in the Reich: "The belief has become universal that Stalingrad marks the turning point in the war... Unstable citizens see Stalingrad as the beginning of the end."

In Germany, in January 1943, total (universal) mobilization into the army was announced. The working day has increased to 12 hours. But simultaneously with the desire of the Hitler regime to gather the forces of the nation into an "iron fist", there was a growing rejection of his policy in different groups population. So, one of the youth circles issued a leaflet with an appeal: “Students! Students! The German people are watching us! We are expected to be freed from the Nazi terror... Those who died near Stalingrad call on us: get up, people, the flames are kindling!”

After the turning point in the course of hostilities on the fronts, the number of underground groups and armed detachments that fought against the invaders and their accomplices in the occupied countries increased significantly. In France, poppies became more active - partisans, sabotaging railways, attacking German posts, warehouses, etc.

One of the leaders of the French Resistance movement, Charles de Gaulle, wrote in his memoirs:

“Until the end of 1942, there were few maquis units and their actions were not particularly effective. But then hope increased, and with it the number of those willing to fight increased. In addition, the compulsory "labor service", which in a few months mobilized half a million young men, mostly workers, for use in Germany, as well as the dissolution of the "truce army", prompted many dissenters to go underground. The number of more or less significant resistance groups increased, and they waged a guerrilla war, which played a paramount role in exhausting the enemy, and later in the unfolding battle for France.

Figures and facts

The number of participants in the resistance movement (1944):

• France - over 400 thousand people;
• Italy - 500 thousand people;
• Yugoslavia - 600 thousand people;
• Greece - 75 thousand people.

By the middle of 1944, the leading bodies of the resistance movement had formed in many countries, uniting various currents and groups - from communists to Catholics. For example, in France, the National Council of the Resistance included representatives of 16 organizations. The most resolute and active participants in the Resistance were the communists. For the sacrifices made in the struggle against the invaders, they were called the “party of the executed”. In Italy, communists, socialists, Christian Democrats, liberals, members of the Action Party and the Labor Democracy party participated in the work of the committees of national liberation.

All participants in the Resistance sought, first of all, to liberate their countries from occupation and fascism. But on the question of what kind of power should be established after this, the views of representatives of individual movements diverged. Some advocated the restoration of pre-war regimes. Others, above all the Communists, sought to establish a new, "people's democratic government."

Liberation of Europe

The beginning of 1944 was marked by major offensive operations by the Soviet troops in the southern and northern sections of the Soviet-German front. Ukraine and Crimea were liberated, and the blockade of Leningrad that lasted 900 days was lifted. In the spring of this year, Soviet troops reached the state border of the USSR for more than 400 km, approached the borders of Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Romania. Continuing the defeat of the enemy, they began to liberate the countries of Eastern Europe. Next to the Soviet soldiers, units of the 1st Czechoslovak brigade under the command of L. Svoboda and the 1st Polish division named after L. Svoboda, formed during the war years on the territory of the USSR, fought for the freedom of their peoples. T. Kosciuszko under the command of 3. Berling.

At this time, the Allies finally opened a second front in Western Europe. On June 6, 1944, American and British troops landed in Normandy, on the northern coast of France.

The bridgehead between the cities of Cherbourg and Caen was occupied by 40 divisions with a total strength of up to 1.5 million people. The Allied forces were commanded by the American General D. Eisenhower. Two and a half months after the landing, the Allies began to advance deep into French territory. They were opposed by about 60 understaffed German divisions. At the same time, resistance detachments launched an open struggle against the German army in the occupied territory. On August 19, an uprising began in Paris against the troops of the German garrison. General de Gaulle, who arrived in France with the Allied troops (by that time he was proclaimed head of the Provisional Government of the French Republic), fearing the "anarchy" of the mass liberation struggle, insisted that the French tank division of Leclerc be sent to Paris. On August 25, 1944, this division entered Paris, which was practically liberated by that time by the rebels.

Having liberated France and Belgium, where in a number of provinces the Resistance forces also undertook armed actions against the invaders, by September 11, 1944, the Allied troops reached the German border.

At that time, a frontal offensive of the Red Army was taking place on the Soviet-German front, as a result of which the countries of Eastern and Central Europe.

Dates and events

Fighting in the countries of Eastern and Central Europe in 1944-1945.

1944

• July 17 - Soviet troops crossed the border with Poland; released Chelm, Lublin; in the liberated territory, the power of the new government, the Polish Committee of National Liberation, began to assert itself.
• August 1 - the beginning of the uprising against the invaders in Warsaw; this performance, prepared and directed by the government in exile in London, was defeated by the beginning of October, despite the heroism of its participants; by order of the German command, the population was expelled from Warsaw, and the city itself was destroyed.
• August 23 - the overthrow of the Antonescu regime in Romania, a week later, Soviet troops entered Bucharest.
• August 29 - the beginning of the uprising against the invaders and the reactionary regime in Slovakia.
• September 8 - Soviet troops entered the territory of Bulgaria.
• September 9 - anti-fascist uprising in Bulgaria, coming to power of the government of the Fatherland Front.
• October 6 - Soviet troops and units of the Czechoslovak Corps entered the territory of Czechoslovakia.
• October 20 - The troops of the People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia and the Red Army liberated Belgrade.
• October 22 - units of the Red Army crossed the border of Norway and October 25 occupied the port of Kirkenes.

1945

• January 17 - the troops of the Red Army and the Polish Army liberated Warsaw.
• January 29 - Soviet troops crossed the German border in the Poznan region. February 13 - Red Army troops take Budapest.
• April 13 - Soviet troops entered Vienna.
• April 16 - The Berlin operation of the Red Army began.
• April 18 - American units entered the territory of Czechoslovakia.
• April 25 - Soviet and American troops met on the Elbe River near the city of Torgau.

Many thousands of Soviet soldiers gave their lives for the liberation of European countries. In Romania, 69 thousand soldiers and officers died, in Poland - about 600 thousand, in Czechoslovakia - more than 140 thousand, and about the same in Hungary. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers died in other, including opposing, armies. They fought on different sides of the front, but they were similar in one thing: no one wanted to die, especially in the last months and days of the war.

In the course of liberation in the countries of Eastern Europe, the question of power acquired paramount importance. The pre-war governments of a number of countries were in exile and now sought to return to leadership. But new governments and local authorities appeared in the liberated territories. They were created on the basis of the organizations of the National (People's) Front, which arose during the war years as an association of anti-fascist forces. The organizers and most active participants in the national fronts were communists and social democrats. The programs of the new governments envisaged not only the elimination of occupational and reactionary, pro-fascist regimes, but also broad democratic transformations in political life and socio-economic relations.

Defeat of Germany

In the fall of 1944, the troops of the Western powers - members of the anti-Hitler coalition approached the borders of Germany. In December of this year, the German command launched a counteroffensive in the Ardennes (Belgium). American and British troops were in a difficult position. D. Eisenhower and W. Churchill turned to I. V. Stalin with a request to speed up the offensive of the Red Army in order to divert German forces from west to east. By decision of Stalin, the offensive along the entire front was launched on January 12, 1945 (8 days earlier than planned). W. Churchill later wrote: "It was a wonderful feat on the part of the Russians - to accelerate a broad offensive, undoubtedly at the cost of human lives." On January 29, Soviet troops entered the territory of the German Reich.

On February 4-11, 1945, a conference of the heads of government of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain took place in Yalta. I. Stalin, F. Roosevelt and W. Churchill agreed on plans for military operations against Germany and the post-war policy in relation to it: zones and conditions of occupation, actions to destroy the fascist regime, the procedure for collecting reparations, etc. An agreement was also signed at the conference on the entry USSR in the war against Japan 2-3 months after the surrender of Germany.

From the documents of the conference of the leaders of the USSR, Great Britain and the USA in the Crimea (Yalta, February 4-11, 1945):

“...Our inexorable goal is the destruction of German militarism and Nazism and the creation of guarantees that Germany will never again be able to disturb the peace of the whole world. We are determined to disarm and disband all German armed forces, once and for all to destroy the German General base who has repeatedly contributed to the revival of German militarism, to seize or destroy all German military equipment, to liquidate or take control of all German industry that could be used for war production; subject all war criminals to just and speedy punishment and exact compensation in kind for the destruction caused by the Germans; wipe out the Nazi Party, Nazi laws, organizations and institutions; remove all Nazi and militaristic influence from public institutions from the cultural and economic life of the German people and to take jointly such other measures in Germany as may be necessary for the future peace and security of the whole world. Our goals do not include the destruction of the German people. Only when Nazism and militarism are eradicated will there be hope for a worthy existence for the German people and a place for them in the community of nations.”

By mid-April 1945, Soviet troops approached the capital of the Reich, on April 16 the Berlin operation began (front commanders G.K. Zhukov, I.S. Konev, K.K. Rokossovsky). It was distinguished both by the power of the offensive of the Soviet units, and by the fierce resistance of the defenders. On April 21, Soviet units entered the city. On April 30, A. Hitler committed suicide in his bunker. The next day, the Red Banner fluttered over the Reichstag building. On May 2, the remnants of the Berlin garrison capitulated.

During the battle for Berlin, the German command issued an order: "Defend the capital to the last man and to the last bullet." Teenagers - members of the Hitler Youth - were mobilized into the army. In the photo - one of these soldiers, last defenders Reich captured.

On May 7, 1945, General A. Jodl signed an act of unconditional surrender of the German troops at the headquarters of General D. Eisenhower in Reims. Stalin considered such a unilateral surrender to the Western powers insufficient. In his opinion, capitulation should have taken place in Berlin and before the high command of all countries of the anti-Hitler coalition. On the night of May 8-9, in the Berlin suburb of Karlshorst, Field Marshal W. Keitel, in the presence of representatives of the high command of the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France, signed the act of unconditional surrender of Germany.

Prague was the last European capital to be liberated. On May 5, an uprising against the invaders began in the city. A large grouping of German troops under the command of Field Marshal F. Scherner, who refused to lay down their arms and broke through to the west, threatened to capture and destroy the capital of Czechoslovakia. In response to the request of the rebels for help, parts of three Soviet fronts were hastily transferred to Prague. On May 9 they entered Prague. As a result of the Prague operation, about 860 thousand enemy soldiers and officers were captured.

July 17 - August 2, 1945 in Potsdam (near Berlin) a conference of the heads of government of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain was held. I. Stalin, G. Truman (US President after F. Roosevelt, who died in April 1945), K. Attlee (who replaced W. Churchill as British Prime Minister) who participated in it discussed “the principles of a coordinated Allied policy towards the defeated Germany". A program of democratization, denazification, and demilitarization of Germany was adopted. The total amount of reparations that she had to pay was confirmed - $ 20 billion. Half was intended for the Soviet Union (later it was estimated that the damage inflicted by the Nazis on the Soviet country amounted to about 128 billion dollars). Germany was divided into four occupation zones - Soviet, American, British and French. Berlin, liberated by the Soviet troops, and Vienna, the capital of Austria, were placed under the control of the four allied powers.

At the Potsdam Conference. In the first row from left to right: K. Attlee, G. Truman, I. Stalin

The establishment of an International Military Tribunal to try Nazi war criminals was envisaged. The border between Germany and Poland was established along the Oder and Neisse rivers. East Prussia departed to Poland and partially (Königsberg area, now Kaliningrad) - to the USSR.

End of the war

In 1944, at a time when the armies of the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition were conducting a broad offensive against Germany and its allies in Europe, Japan intensified its operations in Southeast Asia. Its troops launched a massive offensive in China, capturing a territory with a population of over 100 million people by the end of the year.

The number of the Japanese army reached at that time 5 million people. Its units fought with particular stubbornness and fanaticism, defending their positions to the last soldier. In the army and aviation, there were kamikazes - suicide bombers who sacrificed their lives by directing specially equipped aircraft or torpedoes at enemy military facilities, undermining themselves along with enemy soldiers. The American military believed that it would be possible to defeat Japan no earlier than 1947, with losses of at least 1 million people. The participation of the Soviet Union in the war against Japan could, in their opinion, greatly facilitate the achievement of the tasks set.

In accordance with the commitment given at the Crimean (Yalta) Conference, the USSR declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945. But the Americans did not want to cede the leading role in the future victory to the Soviet troops, especially since by the summer of 1945, atomic weapons had been created in the USA. On August 6 and 9, 1945, American planes dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Historians testimonial:

“On August 6, a B-29 bomber appeared over Hiroshima. The alarm was not announced, since the appearance of one aircraft did not seem to pose a serious threat. At 8:15 a.m., an atomic bomb was dropped by parachute. A few moments later, a blinding fireball flashed over the city, the temperature at the epicenter of the explosion reached several million degrees. Fires in the city, built up with light wooden houses, covered an area within a radius of more than 4 km. Japanese authors write: “Hundreds of thousands of people who became victims of atomic explosions died an unusual death - they died after terrible torment. Radiation penetrated even into the bone marrow. People without the slightest scratch, seemingly completely healthy, after a few days or weeks, or even months, their hair suddenly fell out, the gums began to bleed, diarrhea appeared, the skin became covered with dark spots, hemoptysis began, and in full consciousness they died.

(From the book: Rozanov G. L., Yakovlev N. N. Recent history. 1917-1945)

Hiroshima. 1945

As a result nuclear explosions in Hiroshima, 247 thousand people died, in Nagasaki there were up to 200 thousand killed and wounded. Later, many thousands of people died from wounds, burns, radiation sickness, the number of which has not yet been accurately calculated. But politicians didn't think about it. And the cities that were bombed were not important military installations. Those who used the bombs mainly wanted to demonstrate their strength. US President G. Truman, having learned that the bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima, exclaimed: "This is the greatest event in history!"

On August 9, the troops of three Soviet fronts (over 1 million 700 thousand personnel) and parts of the Mongolian army launched an offensive in Manchuria and on the coast North Korea. A few days later they penetrated in separate sections into enemy territory for 150-200 km. The Japanese Kwantung Army (numbering about 1 million people) was in danger of defeat. On August 14, the Japanese government announced its acceptance of the proposed terms of surrender. But the Japanese troops did not stop resistance. Only after August 17 did units of the Kwantung Army begin to lay down their arms.

On September 2, 1945, representatives of the Japanese government signed an act of unconditional surrender of Japan on board the American battleship Missouri.

World War II is over. It was attended by 72 states with a total population of over 1.7 billion people. The fighting took place on the territory of 40 countries. 110 million people were mobilized into the armed forces. According to updated estimates, up to 62 million people died in the war, including about 27 million Soviet citizens. Thousands of cities and villages were destroyed, innumerable material and cultural values ​​were destroyed. Mankind paid a huge price for the victory over the invaders who aspired to world domination.

The war in which atomic weapons were first used showed that armed conflicts in modern world threaten to destroy not only everything more people, but also humanity as a whole, all life on earth. The hardships and losses of the war years, as well as examples of human self-sacrifice and heroism, left a memory of themselves in several generations of people. The international and socio-political consequences of the war turned out to be significant.

References:
Aleksashkina L. N. / General History. XX- beginning of XXI century.

The USSR at the end of World War II in the assessments of American historiography

world war american cold

The exit of the Red Army beyond the state border of the USSR marked the beginning of the final stage of the Second World War. Since 1944, the period of formation of the post-war fate of the entire world community begins, in which the USSR and the USA played the most important, and in many cases the decisive role.

This stage of the war is also traditionally considered by domestic and foreign researchers as a period of transition to a conflict confrontation between the superpowers. Such an assessment is present in American historiography. Domestic historians, as a rule, show an increased interest in the interpretations of Soviet foreign policy by their American colleagues. Much less attention has been paid to the perception by American historians of the socio-political characteristics of the Soviet system that are present in works on the history of World War II.

American historical literature on the Soviet Union has a number of significant gaps. Historians, as a rule, only record this or that assessment of the Soviet regime, without supporting the terms used with facts. So, according to M. Thornton, even in 1944-1945. for the American leadership, the USSR was a dictatorship under Stalin's control, with purges, secret police, and a gulag. J. Lucas calls the political regime in the USSR that had developed by the end of the war "crude communist democracy", and W. Lafeber "dictatorship". D. Dunn characterizes the Soviet regime as "Stalin's totalitarian power", or "Stalin's empire". S. Achton uses the term "Soviet totalitarianism". T. Bailey in his work “America Looks at Russia” made a very controversial (as public opinion polls show) conclusion that throughout the Second World War, “most Americans regarded fascism as a lesser evil compared to communism, and fascist ideology as less dangerous than communist." This author makes his assessments on the basis of an analysis of the internal politics of the Soviet and Nazi systems: the Nazis showed greater respect for private property, they did not advocate atheism, did not preach a world revolution, and did not create their own Comintern with the aim of inciting contradictions.

M. Hunt in his work "Ideology and American Foreign Policy" divides all the states of the 1940s. into two types: democratic (“like the United States”) and non-democratic (“communist, fascist, Nazi”). Further, this author unites all "non-democratic" states "regardless of their forms of government" with the common characteristic "despotism".

A more balanced assessment of the Soviet political system is presented in the works of M. Glantz and V. Mastna. Both authors consider not so much the nature of the regime as its most important goal at the end of the war: "... to preserve and defend the Soviet Union as the engine of the world revolution" after "socialism has become strong and secure within Soviet borders" .

Another noteworthy approach to assessing the Soviet regime is contained in the work of D. Fleming. As the reason for the disagreements that emerged in Soviet-American relations towards the end of the war, this researcher cites differences in the interpretation in the Soviet Union and the United States of the very concept of "democracy". Assessing the Soviet political regime, Fleming writes that what was happening in the USSR at the end of the war could by no means be called democracy.

The fundamental denial of any possible threat to the United States from the USSR is present in the work of A. L. Strong, who worked closely with the Soviet Information Bureau. In her opinion, the Soviet political system at the end of the war was "socialism in one country" and carried absolutely no threat to the Western world.

W. Taubman, on the whole, agrees with Strong: the researcher calls the political regime of the USSR "socialism", without specifying, however, to what extent and to what territories this system extended.

Thus, the polarization of the opinions of American authors regarding the Soviet political system was quite tangible, but the prevailing characteristics were still far from flattering for the USSR epithets such as "dictatorship" and "despotism". According to M. Lerner, the prejudice of American historians in assessing the Soviet system can be explained by the fact that the socialist system and communism for Americans were considered not only as alien phenomena, but also as something threatening, subversive. These words seem deep meaning: we are talking not so much about Soviet insensitivity to Western values, but about the manifestation of the American logical chain "other alien hostile", the reproduction mechanism of which was developed by the political culture of the United States.

I. V. Stalin became the object of attention of American historians. Its special place in the context of research interest is determined by the fact that it was with him that contemporaries and descendants associated two of the most important events in the history of the 19th century. victory over fascism and the start of the Cold War.

The conclusions of researchers analyzing the personality of Stalin and the ideas about him that are common in American society, on the whole, fit into the framework of the assessments formed by contemporaries. As an example of deviation from them, one should note the infrequent appearance of idealized estimates. The positive tone in the characterization of the Soviet leader was most clearly manifested in the work of the Chicago professor W. McKag, where Stalin is portrayed as a “fighter for peace”, and all the blame for the post-war confrontation is placed on Western leaders who refused to accept the “hand of friendship” . The above description can be supplemented by the statement of the famous American historian L. Rose, who analyzed Stalin's behavior at the Yalta Conference: “He [Stalin. O.R.] could put a series of ultimatums on the negotiating table with regard to Eastern Europe, could refuse to discuss the issue of reparations and generally demand anything as trophies. One glance at the map is enough, and the positions taken by the Red Army in February 1945 would have shown any sane person in the West that there was no need for Stalin to honor his obligations or maintain contact with the anti-Hitler coalition. But the marshal wanted the coalition to continue to exist.

The image of the "Russian bear", aggressive and peremptory in solving foreign policy problems, is reflected in the work of the American researcher H. de Santis.

The inconsistency of Stalin's presence of light (tolerance in relations with allies) and dark (treachery and inflexibility) sides is emphasized by well-known researchers of diplomatic history L. Aronsen and L. Kitchen. Perhaps, this type of Stalin was most clearly revealed by J. Hosking. Criticizing many of the actions of the Soviet leader, the researcher notes that it was Stalin who managed to create the highest "multinational unity, which no Russian leader has been able to achieve either earlier or later."

American historians who support Stalin's "dictatorial" image tend to be sharper in their judgments, even compared to conservative public figures and publicists at the end of the war. These authors closely linked the concepts of "Stalin" and "Soviet Union", "Stalin" and "Kremlin". This attitude was maximally manifested in the works of Martin Malia and Robert Tucker, who assessed Soviet foreign policy in Eastern Europe exclusively in a “Stalinist” tone, introducing the appropriate terminology into circulation: Stalinist appetites, the Stalinist model, the Stalinist empire, the Stalinist formula, etc.

This trend also manifested itself in the assessment of the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin, which American researchers characterized very critically. For example, the well-known researcher R. Levering uses for this a remark by the columnist J. Brown, popular during the war years, who wrote: “Even Napoleon Bonaparte did not bow to the Russian Tsar as much as Churchill and Roosevelt did to Stalin. Their meetings take place on the territory of Stalin or in countries dominated by the Soviet Union. All this humiliates the pride of Americans.

Assessing Stalin's relationship with Western leaders, B. Weisberger singled out the negative personal characteristics of the leader, seeing in them the main reason for the aggravation of international relations after the end of the war: "Stalin's rudeness and cruelty played into the hands of American hardliners, and at the most decisive moments" . The opinion of this historian partially echoes the words of M. Lerner, who noted during the war: “In order to successfully act as Machiavelli, great confidence, great strength and support of the masses are required. Stalin can play such a role.

Analyzing the characteristics of I. V. Stalin, one should single out one feature inherent in all US historians, regardless of their affiliation with one or another historiographic school: even if any action of the Soviet Union was implemented through another person, the Americans were not a secret of authorship or at least the required Stalinist approval of the given Soviet action. Stalin's behavior itself, in turn, was seen as "synonymous with Soviet politics."

The special politicization of the historiography of the Second World War also led to the close attention of American authors to the characterization of the state of the armed forces of the USSR. In this regard, the analysis of the images of the Soviet army that formed in the minds of Americans at the end of the war is important not only in terms of identifying their diversity, but also in connection with the importance of understanding the factors that determined this plurality.

The problem of the representation of the images of the Red Army in American public opinion at the end of World War II is based on the recognition (with a greater or lesser degree of categoricalness) of a special role armed forces in post-war processes. However, the degree of emphasis on the "power" factor among historians different schools is not the same.

The "violent" theory, according to which the USSR secured its leading place in the post-war system of international relations with bayonets, became the most widespread. This position has found wide circulation in the official direction of American historiography.

One of the first to draw attention to the problem of understanding the Red Army as a phenomenon that should be evaluated not only in the military-strategic, but also in the political (taking into account the post-war perspective) coordinate system was the well-known American historian and political scientist, specialist in the USSR A. Dallin. In his work "Red Soviet Russia", published in 1944, he made a very disappointing forecast based on historical parallels. In his opinion, the time of Russia's highest successes in international politics is the era of Catherine the Great. However, the same period is also known as the darkest era of serfdom. "There is no reason to draw a parallel between the level of well-being of the people and their heroism in the war." Therefore, the courage and selflessness of the Soviet people, shown in the fight against fascism, in the opinion of this author, should not give rise to hopes that the military successes of the Red Army will make Soviet foreign policy sensitive to the aspirations of other peoples.

Dallin's work served as a kind of impetus for the appearance of numerous works of a comparative historical nature. It is interesting to note that the problem of the historical image of Russia and its armed forces was widely reflected in the works of researchers of the 1950s, who had the opportunity to observe, on the one hand, the apogee of the triumph of the Soviet armed forces, and on the other, the transition to the Cold War. The chronology of the transition from war to peace, and then to confrontation, naturally determined the contrast of historical comparisons and assessments. This historiographical tradition is based on an almost categorical recognition of the continuity of the foreign policy line of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire. For example, M. Uren emphasized: “Modern Russia cannot shake off the influence of its past just like other nations.” F. Schumann, a well-known American Sovietologist, agrees with Uhren: "The factors that for many centuries determined Russia's attitude to the world persist regardless of the form of government." Consequently, the foreign policy of Russia is identical to the foreign policy of the USSR.

Many American authors have fixed "the political and ideological traditions laid down by tsarism" as the basis for the foreign policy of the USSR. This idea was preached by F. Mosley, who generally sees the origins of Russian imperialism in historical processes originating in the middle of the 15th century.

The "accusatory" line of the official direction was continued in the 1960s-1970s. Thus, for American researchers, there was no doubt that without the army, the USSR "would never have succeeded in achieving a dominant role" in the region. Some American authors note that "the fate of Eastern Europe was decisively determined by the fact that most of this region was liberated from German troops by the Soviet Union" .

A very interesting assessment of the Soviet armed forces from the standpoint of official historiography was given by K. Raivek and F.K. Barghun, who wrote that “the power of Soviet propaganda was multiplied many times over by the heroic and great campaigns of the Red Army. Soviet propaganda exploited the heroism of the Red Army.

The ratio of military losses and the special role of the USSR acquired at the end of the war in international affairs was studied within the framework of the revisionist direction. For example, researcher F. Neil, recognizing the relationship between military power and foreign policy, defended the Soviet foreign policy course. The Russians, he writes, were quite understandably proud of their success in the war and were determined to play a role in the world in accordance with the price they had to pay for victory. At the same time, the researcher emphasizes the "defensive" nature of the Soviet international course.

Supporters of the radical-critical direction note the "defensive" nature of the actions of the Red Army. The Soviet Union, having suffered heavy losses as a result of Germany's aggression, was forced to solve the problem of its own security on a European scale in the interests of its own security.

D. Clemens states that only “the actions of the Red Army, and not the decisions of the Yalta Conference, ensured Moscow’s guarantees that after the Second World War there would be no “bourgeois” anti-Soviet governments on the periphery of the Soviet Union” .

Modern American historiography, based on the trends laid down by previous generations of historians, is still more restrained in its comments. Two examples are most illustrative here.

B. Fousek in his work "Eastern Europe 19451969" focuses not on the direct imposition of Soviet socio-political methods by the Red Army, but on the influence of its high-profile victories on the growth of communist predilections.

Ch. Gati in the book “The Block That Failed”, analyzing the policy of the USSR at the final stage of the war, concluded that the Red Army command in its actions was guided solely by security considerations, and not by the idea of ​​a world revolution, and at the end of the war did not use “ force" method of establishing pro-Soviet regimes.

In contrast to these authors, it is appropriate to note the presence in contemporary American writings of "traditional force" interpretations of history. So, according to W. Smisser, Stalin already in 1944 had the potential to end the war with Germany, but he preferred to cover Eastern Europe with the Red Army to indicate his dominant position here.

The transition of the United States to the rank of world political, military and economic leader contributed to the spread of ideas and ideas about America's special historical mission, which were based on traditional positions of exclusivity, superiority, and destiny. The very focus on "American exceptionalism" gave rise to a special ideological climate in the country, which denied the existence of any other world authority and influenced a qualitatively new perception of the Soviet Union.

The authoritative American historian A. Ulam, speaking of the leading role of ideological confrontation, formulated a conclusion about the unsolved mysteries of Soviet behavior. Ulam emphasized that despite the apparent solidity of the Soviet ideology, Moscow's policy was contradictory, combining expansion and coexistence. This idea was even placed in the title of one of his books. The factor of communist ideology became the subject of a particularly sharp controversy in American historiography in the 1960s and 1970s. Historians of the "official" direction viewed Soviet foreign policy as "expansion", "aggression", "forcible spread of communism", as a result of which US policy was placed in the ideological format of protecting Europe's "democracy ideals" from the imposition of communist ideology. According to J. Fulbright, the Americans in assessing Soviet ideology were guided by the following considerations: “The negative in communism is not in its dogmatic content, which is utopian at worst, but in its fanatical self-confidence, in its messianic stubbornness and aspirations, and in its intolerance towards disagreement."

Questioning the natural nature of the regimes of the countries of Eastern Europe, representatives of the "official" direction considered the results of the Second World War as the defeat of the entire Western civilization, as a result of which Europe was defeated by communism.

Representatives of the "realpolitik" school indirectly place the blame for the aggravation of ideological tensions on the American leadership. In accordance with their logic, Washington's actions and ideals were divorced from reality, resulting in a shift in the balance of political power towards socialism. R. L. Garthoff questioned the validity of such conclusions: “The prevailing opinion in the West was erroneous in that. that communist ideology was believed to force Soviet leaders into expansion, the ability of the communists to undermine the free world was exaggerated.

Representatives of the radical historiography of the United States also did not ignore the problem of communist ideology, which is considered as a factor that led to the beginning of the Cold War. Only the fault in this case falls on the American side. The criticism here is based on two aspects of accusations against American policy and defense of the Soviet course. For example, J. and G. Kolko blame the outbreak of the Cold War on the expansionist ideology of Washington and note that even if there had been no Soviet Union, the post-war situation would hardly have been different.

It should be noted that the attention of American historians of the post-war period was attracted not so much by the essence of communist ideology, its main postulates, direction, methods of implementation, as by the reasons for the aggravation of ideological confrontation at the end of the war.

A. Schlesinger, Jr., analyzing the ideological problem, draws attention to the peculiarities of American national logic: “The growth of American power strengthened the messianism of those who believed that America was God's anointed. Having a couple of real monsters roaming the world encouraged a dangerous tendency to look everywhere for new monsters to be destroyed. It is noteworthy that in this way Schlesinger captures the aggressiveness of not only the communist ideology, but also the ideology of the United States, not seeing significant differences between them in this sense.

The multifactorial nature of the problem of establishing the communist ideology in Europe required its structural analysis. The most thorough attempt was made by C. Gati. The author considers the main stages of the establishment of the communist ideology in Europe in line with the concept of "communist attack". During the first phase, the communist parties in Eastern Europe tended to cooperate with other parties within coalition governments in order to mobilize all resources to continue the war against Germany. At the second stage, multi-party governments gave way to a pseudo-coalition in which the communist parties, already the predominant force, nevertheless took into account the positions of non-communists. This was done in order to "appease" the West and internal criticism. The third stage is associated with the "process of complete socialization", the content of which was to seize the commanding heights in government and the formation of monolithic communist parties.

The classic of American "political realism" G. Morgenthau, as the main factor in the conflict of the USSR, the USA called the confrontation of "two hostile and incompatible ideologies, two systems of government, two ways of life, each of which sought to expand the range of its political values ​​and institutions and prevent expansion from the opposite sides".

The perception of Soviet ideology by American historians thus became the pivot in assessing the overall image of the USSR. If we rely on the classifications of the main directions of US historiography that have been established both in domestic and American science, then we can state that the main approaches used by historians of different scientific schools contributed to the formation of several models of perception of the USSR.

A very influential position in American historiography is still occupied by the “official” school, whose adherents proceed from the postulate that at the end of World War II the United States should inevitably become the leader of the democratic world. The Soviet Union, which did not want to recognize this fact, became the culprit in unleashing the Cold War. In accordance with the image of the “official” school formed by historians, by the end of the war the USSR was a state whose domestic and foreign policy principles and actions were contrary to American values ​​and threatened the existence of the entire democratic world.

In the first post-war decades, a school of "political realism" took shape in US historiography. All the actions of the Kremlin at the end of the war, according to the "realists", were subject to aggressive plans. The image of the USSR by the authors of this school was considered exclusively in the context of the concept of the strength of the "criminal communist regime" and the indomitable communist expansion.

In the first post-war years, the writings of historians of the “revisionist” direction, who blamed the beginning of the Cold War on the United States, enjoyed a noticeable influence. They criticized the Soviet line of American foreign policy as "pro-communist". In accordance with their logic, the USSR at the end of the war was a state with an alien value system, an aggressive army and an offensive ideology. According to these authors, it was precisely the criminal misunderstanding of the goals of the USSR that led to the fact that the US public was for a long time in the thrall of illusions.

Representatives of the radical-critical direction approached the assessment of the USSR from other methodological positions. The blame for the aggravation of the international situation in their interpretation falls on the American government, which did not want to understand the goals and objectives of Soviet policy. The Soviet Union is presented by the radicals as the state that suffered the greatest losses and won the most significant victories in the war. In their writings, there is an image of a country that has made every effort to resolve contentious issues, whose tough behavior was motivated by the requirements of its own security.

Since the late 1970s the new “post-revisionist” direction placed the responsibility for the aggravation of the international situation at the end of the war on both sides. According to the authors of this trend, the policy of the USSR at the end of the war was determined not only by external, but also by internal factors, the desire to ensure security, ideology, etc. Nevertheless, despite the recognition of objective moments in the behavior of the Soviet side, post-revisionists in their works or deliberately create an image of the USSR, tangibly determined by such qualities as aggressiveness and unpredictability.

An analysis of the images of the USSR at the end of World War II, presented in American historiography, demonstrates that the authors paid significant attention to the personality of the Soviet leader, ideology, and the state-political system. Attention to them was due to the projection of these facets of the Soviet model onto Europe, which was seen by most Americans as a threat to Western values.

Notes

• 1. Thornton M. Times of Heroism, Times of Terror: American Presidential and the Cold War. Westport; L.,
• 2004. P. 16.
• 2. Lukas J. A History of the Cold War. N.Y., 1961. P. 52.
• 3. LaFeber W. The American Age. United State Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad since 1750. N.Y.; L., 1989. P. 403.
• 4. Dunn D. Between Roosevelt and Stalin. M., 2004. S. 364.
• 5. Ashton S. P. The Search to Detente. The Politics of East-West Relations since 1945. N.Y., 1989. P. 6.
• 6. Bailey Th. A. America Faces Russia: Russian-American Relations from Early Times to our day. N.Y., 1950. P. 277.
• 7. Hunt M. Ideology and U.S. foreign policy. New Haven, 1987. P. 46.
• 8. Glantz M. E. FDR and the Soviet Union. The President's Battle Over Foreign Policy. 2005. P. 151; Mastny V. The Cold War and Soviet Insecurity. The Stalin Years. N.Y., 1996. P. 15, 20.
• 9. Fleming F. D. The Cold War and Its Origins. 1917--
• 1960. V.I.L., 1960. P. 204, 209.
• 10. Strong A. L. The Stalin Era. N.Y., 1956. P. 108.
• 11. Taubman W. Stalin's American Policy: From Entente to Detente to Cold War. N.Y.; L., 1982. P. 83.
• 12. Lerner M. The development of civilization in America. Way of life and thought in the United States today. T. 2. M., 1992. C. 459.
• 13. McCagg W. Stalin Embattled 1943-1948. Detroit, 1978. P. 260, 312.
• 14. Rose L. After Yalta. N.Y., 1973. P. 25-26.
• 15. De Santis H. Diplomacy of Silence. The American Foreign Service, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War, 1933-1947. Chicago, 1980. P. 106.
• 16. Aronsen L., Kitchen L. The Origins of the Cold War in Comparative Perspective. American, British and Canadian Relations with the Soviet Union, 1941-1948. M.; L.., 1988. P. 33.
• 17. Hosking J. Russia and Russians. Book. 2. M., 2003.

• 18. Malia M. Soviet tragedy. History of socialism in Russia. 1917-1991. M., 2002. C. 318-320; Tucker R. C. Political Culture and Leadership in Soviet Russia. From Lenin to Gorbachev. Brighton, 1987. P. 100103. Charles Gati, analyzing the cooperation of the "Big Three" during the war years, also quite often operates with "Stalinist" categories. Gati Ch. The Block That Failed. Soviet-East European Relations in Transition. Bloomington, 1990. P. 9-12.
• 19. Levering R. American Opinion and the Russian Alliance, 1939-1945. Chapel Hill, 1976. P. 122.
• 20. Weisberger B. Cold War Cold Peace: The United States and Russia since 1945. N.Y. 1985. P. 96.
• 21. RGASPI. F. 515. On. 1. D. 4096. L. 43.
• 22. Ryavec K. W. United States Soviet Relations. N.Y.; L., 1989. P. 48.
• 23. Dallin D. The Red Soviet Russia. New Haven, 1944. P. 42-43.
• 24. Wren M. The Course of Russia History. N.Y., 1958. P. VIII.
• 25. Schuman F. L. The Russian Riddle // Current History. 1955. February. P. 66.
• 26. See: Soviet Power and Policy. N.Y., 1955. P. 373.
• 27 Mosely Ph. The Kremlin and World Politics. N.Y.,
• 1960.
• 28. Ibid. P. 43.
• 29. Rakowska-Hazmstone T., George A. Communism in Eastern Europe. Bloomington; L., 1979. P. 147.
• 30. Rothschild J. A. Communist Eastern Europe. N.Y.,
• 1964. P. 6. Lukas J. A History of the ^ld War. N.Y.,
• 1960. P. 53; On the Eve of Cold War // American Views of Soviet Russia, 1917 -1965. P. 156; Ryavec K.W.U.S. Soviet relations. N.Y.; L., 1989. P. 45; Edelman J. R. Cold War Prelude: On the History of Soviet-American Relations // Questions of History.
• 1991. No. 6. C. 18-19, 21, 24.
• 31. Ryavec K. W. Op. dt. P. 45; Barghoorn F. O. The Soviet Image of the United States. L., 1969. P. 43
• 32. Neal F.U.S. Foreign Policy and the Soviet Union.

S. Barbara, 1961. P. 14-15.

• 33. See: Kolko G., Kolko J. The Limits of Power. The World and United States Foreign Policy, 1943-1945. N.Y., 1968; Alperovitz G. Cold War Essays. N.Y., 1970; LaFeber W. America, Russia and the Cold War, 19171971. N.Y., 1972.
• 34. Clemens D. Sh. Yalta. N.Y., 1970. P. 73.
• 35. Fowkes B. Eastern Europe 1945-1969. From Stalinism to Stalingrad. Harlow etc. 2000. P. 17-18.
• 36. Gati Ch. Op. cit P. 10, 11. See also: Leffler M. Inside Enemy Archives: The Cold War Reopened // Foreign Affairs. 1996 July August. Vol. 75. No. 4. P. 123-125; Idem. The Cold War: What Do We Now Know? // American Historical Review. April 1999 Vol. 104. No. 2. P. 514-516. See: Smyser W. R. From Yalta to Berlin: The Cold War Struggle Over Germany. N.Y., 2000. P. 10.
• 37. Ulam A. Few Unresolved Mysteries About Stalin and the Cold War in Europe: A Modest Agenda for Research // Journal of Cold war Studies. 1999 Winter. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 110-113. See also: Ulam A. Stalin: The Man and His Era. L., 1974; Ulam A. B. Expansion and Coexistence. The History of Soviet Foreign Policy, 1917-1967. N.Y.; Wash., 1968; Ulam A. B. The Rivals. America and Russia since World War II. N.Y., 1976.
• 38. See: Weitz R. Western theories of the origin of the Cold War // Cold War: new approaches, new documents. M., 1995.
• 39. Bemis S. F. Op. cit. P. 423; Ulam A. Expansion and Coexistence. P. 120.
• 40. Fisher L. The Road to Yalta: Soviet Foreign Relations, 1941-1945. N.Y., 1972. P. 215; Lukas J. A History of the Cold War. N.Y., 1961. P. 60; Burnham J. The Struggle for the World. N.Y., 1947. P. 188; See also: Fischer L. Russia, America and the World. N.Y., 1966; Sheldon Ch. The Bolshevization of the USA. N.Y., 1980; Horovitz D. Imperialism and Revolution. L., 1969.
• 41. Fulbright J. W. The presumption of power. M., 1967. C. 84, 87.
• 42. Morgenthau H. American Foreign Policy. A Critical Examination. N.Y., 1952. P. 31.
• 43. Garthoff R. A. Why did “ cold war and why did it end? // International life. 1992. March April. C. 124.
• 44. See for example: Alperovitz G. Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam. The Use of the Atomic Bomb and the American Confrontation with Soviet Power. N.Y.,
• 1965. P. 13, 62-63.
• 45. Kolko G., Kolko J. The Limits of Power. P. 709714.
• 46. ​​Schlesinger A. M. Cycles of American history. M., 1992. P. 83. See also: Paterson T. G. On Every Front: The Making of the Cold War. N.Y.; L., 1979. P. 73.
• 47. Gati Ch. Op. cit. P. 10.
• 48. Op. Cited from: Arbatov G. A. Ideological struggle in modern international relations. M., 1970.

Gafurov Said 05/09/2017 at 10:25

In the days Great Victory the hubbub of revisionist historians about the unbearable implicit racism of the Anglo-Saxons, about Budyonny and Tukhachevsky, the conspiracy of marshals has already become familiar ... What and how was it really? What are the well-known and new facts for a long time? World War II began in the summer of 1937, not in the fall of 1939. The bloc of Pan Poland, Horthy Hungary and Hitlerite Germany tore apart unfortunate Czechoslovakia. It was not for nothing that Churchill called the Polish masters of life the most vile of vile hyenas, and the agreement between Molotov and Ribbentrop was a brilliant success of Soviet diplomacy.

Every year, when Victory Day approaches, various nonhumans try to revise history, shouting that the Soviet Union is not the main winner, and its victory would have been impossible without the help of the allies. Usually they cite the Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty as the main argument.

The very fact that Western historians believe that the Second World War began in September 1939 is due solely to the overt racism of the Western allies, primarily the Anglo-Americans. In fact, World War II began in 1937 when Japan launched an aggression against China.

Japan is the aggressor country, China is the victorious country, and the war went on from 1937 to September 1945, went on without a single break. But for some reason these dates are not called. After all, this happened somewhere in distant Asia, and not in civilized Europe or North America. Although the end is quite obvious: the end of World War II is the surrender of Japan. It is logical that the beginning of this story should be considered the beginning of Japanese aggression against China.

This will remain on the conscience of Anglo-American historians, and we just need to know about it. In fact, the situation is not at all so simple. The question is put in the same way: in what year did the Soviet Union enter World War II? The war has been going on since 1937, and its beginning was not at all the liberation campaign of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army in Poland, when Western Ukraine and Western Belarus were reunited with their brothers in the east. The war began earlier in Europe. It was in the autumn of 1938, when the Soviet Union announced to Pan Poland that if it took part in the aggression against Czechoslovakia, then the non-aggression pact between the USSR and Poland would be considered terminated. This is a very important point; because when a country breaks a non-aggression pact, it is actually a war. The Poles then were very frightened, there were several joint statements. But still, Poland took part, together with the allies of the Nazis and the Chartist Hungary, in the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia. The fighting was coordinated between the Polish and German General Staffs.

Here it is important to recall one document that the patented anti-Sovietists are very fond of: this is the prison testimony of Marshal Tukhachevsky about the strategic deployment of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army. There are papers there that both anti-Soviet and Stalin supporters call very important and interesting. True, their meaningful analysis for some reason is practically nowhere to be found.

The fact is that Tukhachevsky wrote this document in custody back in 1937, and in 1939, when the war on the Western Front began, the situation changed dramatically. The whole meaningful pathos of Tukhachevsky's testimony is that the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army was not in a position to win against the Polish-German coalition. And in accordance with the Hitler-Pilsudski pact (the first brilliant success of Hitler's diplomacy), Poland and Germany should attack the Soviet Union together.

There is a less well-known document - the report of Semyon Budyonny, who was present at the trial of the marshals' conspiracies. Then all the marshals, including Tukhachevsky, Yakir, Uborevich, were sentenced to death - along with a large number of army commanders. The head of the political department of the Red Army, Gamarnik, shot himself. They shot Blucher and Marshal Yegorov, who participated in another conspiracy.

These three military men took part precisely in the conspiracy of the marshals. In the report, Budyonny says that the final impetus that forced Tukhachevsky to start planning a coup was his realization that the Red Army was not able to win against the united allies - Nazi Germany and Poland. That was the main threat.

So, we see that in 1937 Tukhachevsky says: the Red Army has no chance against the Nazis. And in 1938, Poland, Germany and Hungary tear the unfortunate Czechoslovakia to pieces, after which Churchill calls the Polish leaders hyenas and writes that the most vile of the vile led the bravest of the brave.

And only in 1939, thanks to the brilliant successes of Soviet diplomacy and the fact that the Litvinov line was replaced by the Molotov line, the USSR managed to remove this deadly threat, which consisted in the fact that Germany, Poland could oppose the Soviet Union in the West, and in the South western front - Hungary and Romania. And at the same time, Japan had the opportunity to attack in the east.

Tukhachevsky and Budyonny considered the position of the Red Army in this situation practically hopeless. Then diplomats began to work instead of soldiers, who managed to break the bloc between Soviet diplomacy, between Hitler, Beck and Pan Poland, between the Nazis and the Polish leadership, and unleash a war between Germany and Poland. It should be noted that the German army at that moment was practically invincible.

The Germans did not have much combat experience, it consisted only in the Spanish War, in the relatively bloodless Anschluss of Austria, as well as in the bloodless capture of the Sudetenland and then the rest of Czechoslovakia, except for those pieces that, by agreement between the Nazis and Poland and Hungary, went to these countries .

Pan Poland was defeated by the Germans in three weeks. To understand how this happened, it is enough to re-read military memoirs and analytical documents; for example, the famous book of brigade commander Isserson "New Forms of Struggle", which is now becoming popular again. It was a completely unexpected and quick defeat of Poland. In 1940, France, which was then considered the most powerful army in Europe, suffered the same quick three-week and disastrous defeat. Nobody expected this.

But, in any case, such a quick defeat of Poland meant only one thing: Soviet diplomacy worked great, it pushed the borders of the Soviet Union far to the West. After all, in 1941, the Nazis were very close to Moscow, and it is quite possible that these several hundred kilometers, to which the border moved to the West, made it possible to save not only Moscow, but also Leningrad. We have managed to do the almost impossible.

The victory of Soviet diplomacy provided us with guarantees that not only broke the bloc, but also led to the fact that Hitler destroyed the Warsaw threat to Russia. No one expected how rotten the Polish army would then turn out to be. Therefore, when they tell you about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, answer: it was a brilliant response to the Munich agreement, and the Polish lords received a well-deserved punishment. Churchill was right: they were the most vile of the vile.

The Great Victory is not just a holiday that unites us. This is a very important thing in our historical experience, which makes us always remember to keep our gunpowder dry: we are never safe.

Briefly about World War II

Vtoraya mirovaya voyna 1939-1945

Beginning of World War II

Stages of World War II

Causes of World War II

Results of the Second World War

Foreword

• In addition, this is the first war, during which nuclear weapons were first used. In total, 61 countries on all continents took part in this war, which made it possible to call this world war, and the dates of its beginning and end are considered the most significant for the history of all mankind.

• It is worth adding that World War I, despite the defeat of Germany, did not allow to finally defuse the situation and settle territorial disputes.

• Thus, within the framework of this policy, Austria was given up without firing a shot, thanks to which Germany gained enough strength to challenge the rest of the world.
  The states that united against the aggression of Germany and its allies included the Soviet Union, the United States, France, Great Britain and China.

• This was followed by the third stage, which became crushing for Nazi Germany - within a year, the advance deep into the territory of the Union republics was stopped, and the German troops lost the initiative in the war. This stage is considered to be a turning point. During the fourth stage, which ended on May 9, 1945, Nazi Germany was completely defeated, and Berlin was taken by the troops of the Soviet Union. It is also customary to distinguish the fifth, final stage, which lasted until September 2, 1945, in which the last centers of resistance of the allies of Nazi Germany were broken, and nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan.

Briefly about the main

• At the same time, knowing the full extent of the threat, the Soviet authorities, instead of focusing on the defense of their western borders, ordered an attack on Finland. During the bloody take Mannerheim lines several tens of thousands of Finnish defenders died, and more than a hundred thousand Soviet soldiers, while only a small territory north of St. Petersburg was captured.

• However repressive policy Stalin in the 30s significantly weakened the army. After the Holodomor of 1933-1934, carried out in most of modern Ukraine, the suppression of national identity among the peoples of the republics and the destruction of most of the officer corps, there was no normal infrastructure on the western borders of the country, and the local population was so intimidated that at first entire detachments appeared, fighting on the side of the Germans. However, when the Nazis treated the people even worse, the national liberation movements found themselves between two fires, and were quickly destroyed.

• There is an opinion that Nazi Germany's initial success in taking over the Soviet Union was planned. For Stalin, this was a great opportunity to destroy the peoples hostile to him by proxy. Slowing down the advance of the Nazis, throwing crowds of unarmed recruits to the slaughter, full-fledged defensive lines were created near distant cities, on which the German offensive was bogged down.

• The greatest role during the Great Patriotic War was played by several major battles in which Soviet troops inflicted crushing defeats on the Germans. So, in just three months from the beginning of the war, the Nazi troops managed to get to Moscow, where full-fledged defensive lines had already been prepared. A number of battles that took place near the modern capital of Russia are commonly called Battle for Moscow. It lasted from September 30, 1941 to April 20, 1942, and it was here that the Germans suffered their first serious defeat.

• Another, even more important event was the siege of Stalingrad and the Battle of Stalingrad that followed. The siege began on July 17, 1942, and during the turning point of the battle was lifted on February 2, 1943. It was this battle that turned the tide of the war, and took away the strategic initiative from the Germans. Further, from July 5 to August 23, 1943, the Battle of Kursk took place, to this day there has not been a single battle in which such a large number of tanks participated.

• However, we must pay tribute to the allies of the Soviet Union. So, after the bloody Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the US Navy struck at the Japanese fleet, and eventually broke the enemy on their own. However, many still believe that the United States acted extremely cruelly by dropping nuclear bombs on cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After such an impressive show of force, the Japanese capitulated. In addition, the combined forces of the United States and Great Britain, which Hitler, despite defeats in the Soviet Union, feared more Soviet troops, landed in Normandy, and recaptured all the countries captured by the Nazis, thus diverting the forces of the Germans, which helped the Red Army enter Berlin.

• To prevent the terrible events of these six years from being repeated, the participating countries created United Nations, which to this day strives to maintain security throughout the world. The use of nuclear weapons also showed the world how destructive this type of weapon is, so all countries signed an agreement to ban their production and use. And to this day, it is the memory of these events that keeps civilized countries from new conflicts that can turn into a destructive and disastrous war.

The Second World War was the bloodiest and most brutal military conflict in the history of mankind and the only one in which nuclear weapons were used. 61 states took part in it. The dates of the beginning and end of this war (September 1, 1939 - September 2, 1945) are among the most significant for the entire civilized world.

The causes of World War II were the imbalance of power in the world and the problems provoked by the results, in particular territorial disputes.

The United States, England and France, who won the First World War, concluded the Treaty of Versailles on the most unfavorable and humiliating conditions for the losing countries (Turkey and Germany), which provoked an increase in tension in the world. At the same time, adopted in the late 1930s. Britain and France's policy of appeasing the aggressor made it possible for Germany to sharply increase its military potential, which accelerated the transition of the fascists to active military operations.

The members of the anti-Hitler bloc were the USSR, the USA, France, England, China (Chiang Kai-shek), Greece, Yugoslavia, Mexico, etc. On the part of Germany, Italy, Japan, Hungary, Albania, Bulgaria, Finland, China (Wang Jingwei), Thailand, Iraq, etc. participated in World War II. Many states participating in the Second World War did not conduct operations on the fronts, but helped by supplying food, medicines and other necessary resources.

Researchers identify the following stages of World War II:

• first stage: from September 1, 1939 to June 21, 1941 - the period of the European blitzkrieg of Germany and the allies;
• second stage: June 22, 1941 - approximately mid-November 1942 - attack on the USSR and the subsequent failure of the Barbarossa plan;
• the third stage: the second half of November 1942 - the end of 1943 - a radical turning point in the war and the loss of strategic initiative by Germany. At the end of 1943, at the Tehran Conference, in which Roosevelt and Churchill took part, it was decided to open a second front;
• the fourth stage: from the end of 1943 to May 9, 1945 - was marked by the capture of Berlin and the unconditional surrender of Germany;
• fifth stage: May 10, 1945 - September 2, 1945 - during this time, fighting was fought only in Southeast Asia and the Far East. The United States used nuclear weapons for the first time.

The beginning of World War II fell on September 1, 1939. On this day, the Wehrmacht suddenly began aggression against Poland. Despite the retaliatory declaration of war by France, Great Britain and some other countries, no real assistance was provided to Poland. Already on September 28, Poland was captured. The peace treaty between Germany and the USSR was concluded on the same day. Having received a reliable rear, Germany began active preparations for war with France, which capitulated already in 1940, on June 22. Nazi Germany began large-scale preparations for war on eastern front from the USSR. was approved already in 1940, on December 18. The Soviet top leadership received reports of the impending attack, however, fearing to provoke Germany and believing that the attack would be carried out at a later date, they deliberately did not put the border units on alert.

In the chronology of World War II, the period from June 22, 1941 to May 9, 1945, known in Russia as . The USSR on the eve of World War II was an actively developing state. Since the threat of a conflict with Germany increased over time, defense and heavy industry and science developed first of all in the country. Closed design bureaus were created, whose activities were aimed at developing the latest weapons. Discipline was tightened to the maximum at all enterprises and collective farms. In the 30s. more than 80% of the officers of the Red Army were repressed. To make up for the losses, a network of military schools and academies was created. However, there was not enough time for full-fledged training of personnel.

The main battles of World War II, which were of great importance for the history of the USSR:

• (September 30, 1941 - April 20, 1942), which became the first victory of the Red Army;
• (July 17, 1942 - February 2, 1943), which marked a radical turning point in the war;
• (July 5 - August 23, 1943), during which the largest tank battle of the Second World War took place under the village. Prokhorovka;
• which led to the surrender of Germany.

Important events for the course of World War II took place not only on the fronts of the USSR. Among the operations carried out by the allies, it is worth noting:

• the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, which caused the United States to enter World War II;
• the opening of a second front and the landing of troops in Normandy on June 6, 1944;
• the use of nuclear weapons on August 6 and 9, 1945 to strike at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The date of the end of the Second World War was September 2, 1945. Japan signed the act of surrender only after the defeat of the Kwantung Army by the Soviet troops. The battles of World War II, according to the most rough estimates, claimed about 65 million people on both sides.

The Soviet Union suffered the greatest losses in World War II - 27 million citizens of the country were killed. It was the USSR that took the brunt of the blow. These figures, according to some researchers, are approximate. It was the stubborn resistance of the Red Army that became the main reason for the defeat of the Reich.

The results of World War II horrified everyone. Military operations have put the very existence of civilization on the brink. During the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, fascist ideology was condemned, and many war criminals were punished. In order to prevent the possibility of a new world war in the future, at the Yalta Conference in 1945 it was decided to create the United Nations (UN), which still exists today.

The results of the nuclear bombardment of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the signing of pacts on the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and a ban on their production and use. It must be said that the consequences of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are felt today.

The economic consequences of the Second World War were also serious. For Western European countries, it turned into a genuine economic disaster. The influence of Western European countries has significantly decreased. At the same time, the United States managed to maintain and strengthen its positions.

The significance of the Second World War for the Soviet Union is enormous. The defeat of the fascists determined future history countries. According to the results of the conclusion of the peace treaties that followed the defeat of Germany, the USSR significantly expanded its borders.

At the same time, the totalitarian system was strengthened in the Union. In some European countries, communist regimes were established. Victory in the war did not save the USSR from those that followed in the 50s. mass repression.