Introduction

Author(s):  
Anand Toprani

The struggle for oil has been at the center of international politics since the beginning of the twentieth century. Securing oil—or, more precisely, access to it—has also been at the heart of many great powers’ grand strategies during that time, particularly those in oil-poor Europe. The Continent’s geographical and geological endowments, particularly its rich coal seams, had facilitated its rise to global predominance following the conquest of the New World and the start of the Industrial Revolution, but they conspired against it during the Age of Oil. Rather than accept their relegation to second-tier status, Britain and Germany developed elaborate strategies to restore their energy independence. These efforts wound up compromising their security by inducing strategic overextension—for Britain in the Middle East, and for Germany in the Soviet Union—thereby hastening their demise as great powers. For these reasons, the history of oil is also a chapter in the story of Europe’s geopolitical decline....

Author(s):  
Ulambayar Denzenlkham

This article discusses Mongolia’s 15 years of diplomatic efforts to join the United Nations, the main factors that influenced it, and the changing policies and positions of the Soviet Union, the Kuomintang of China, the United States, and other great powers. Although the Mongolian People’s Republic was able to join the United Nations in 1946, it was influenced by the Soviet Union’s communist position. Since 1946, Chiang Kai-shek’s Chinese policy and position have been a major obstacle. The history of the Republic of China, which existed on the mainland between 1912 and 1949, was the history of the struggle for power between the warlords, the history of the struggle between the Kuomintang and the Communists. In the nearly 40 years since the founding of the Republic of China in 1912, neither the warlords nor the Kuomintang have been able to exercise their sovereignty on the mainland, but they are keen to see Outer Mongolia as part of their territory. The Kuomintang was expelled from the mainland in 1949, shortly after 1946. During the Korean War, initiated by Kim Il-sung, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong, Mongolia stood firmly behind North Korea, providing both moral and material support. It has not been mentioned anywhere that this resulted in Mongolia’s efforts at the UN being postponed for many years. When Communist China entered the Korean War, the Kuomintang, which fully supported the US-led UN military operation (peacekeeping), not only continuously provoked at the Security Council of the United Nations, but also presented false documents about the MPR - described as “a Chinese territory seized by the Soviet Union” - sending troops to North Korea.The United States, which has recognized the status quo of the Mongolian People’s Republic, has made it clear that it has played an important role in the country’s admission to the United Nations. Thus Mongolia’s attempt finally succeeded and it became the 101st state to join the United Nations. As a consequence, Mongolia’s independence has been approved by a recognize of Western powers and it began to emerge out of its isolation, participate in decision of global issues, and cooperate with the international community. However, not only did this opportunity not be fully exploited, but due to the Cold War, Mongolia became a hotbed of ideological competition between the socialist and capitalist systems at the United Nations, the speakers’ rostrum Nevetheless,Post-Cold War, a whole new era of cooperation between Mongolia and the United Nations began.


Author(s):  
Piotr H. Kosicki

This book tells a sweeping story of how Catholics from France and Poland wrestled throughout the first half of the twentieth century with a series of earth-shattering challenges to their worldview: the Industrial Revolution, the displacement of dynastic empires by democratic republics, republicanism’s subsequent collapse between the world wars, occupation and genocide by Nazi Germany, and the birth and expansion of the Soviet Union and its Communist proxy regimes. Faced with the ascendancy of both nationalism and Marxism across Europe, Catholic intellectuals found common ground in the pursuit of a just society on earth. Catholics on the Barricades reconstructs the projects forged across multiple generations, spanning from the 1890s through the 1950s. Declaring Catholic “revolution,” France’s and Poland’s Catholic intellectuals ended up serving twin evils: first exclusionary (or integral) nationalism, and then Stalinism as well. To explain this paradox, Catholics on the Barricades offers a conceptual history of “revolution.” After World War II, anti-fascist bona fides led these intellectuals to give the benefit of the doubt to Communist regimes in Eastern Europe—if not actively involve themselves in those regimes’ construction. In addition to peace and personhood, French and Polish Catholics were united by a shared fear of Germany. Their anti-Germanism built on, and preserved, long-standing anti-Semitism. Catholic “revolution,” then, was poisoned from the outset. And yet, its legacy ultimately inspired a turn to dialogue and solidarity, which—fleeting though it has proven to be—helped to bring down the Iron Curtain.


Author(s):  
Mikhail V. Novikov ◽  

The subject of the study is some modern conservative versions of the history of the Soviet Union’s military assistance to the Spanish Republic in 1936–1939. The aim of the article is to attempt a critical analysis of the new and revived versions of the motives of Soviet intervention in the Spanish conflict, of the involvement of the Soviet leadership in large-scale terror against civilians in the republican zone, of the degree of influence of the Soviet leadership and Soviet representatives in Spain on the governmental structure of the Spanish Republic, of the anti-fascist character of the war. The study has established the inconsistency of the versions about Soviet aid as a means of promoting the world revolution in Spain and as an attempt to draw the democratic and fascist states into a major war between themselves through the Spanish conflict, about the possibilities of Stalin in 1936 to manipulate the great powers. It has been proved that conservative historians exaggerate the degree of influence of Stalin and Soviet political representatives in Spain on the military-political leadership of the republic. The impact of the so-called “instruments” of Soviet influence in the Spanish Republic is also exaggerated. The first of the instruments is considered to be the relocation of part of the gold reserve to Moscow, which, allegedly, allowed the Soviet control over the finances of the republic to be established. The second is the activities of Soviet military advisers; the third is the Communist Party of Spain, which was part of the Comintern, and was considered as an obedient tool in the hands of Moscow. It was and still is traditional to attribute responsibility for unleashing large-scale terror against civilians in the republican zone to Stalin, which does not correspond to reality as convincingly proved by the British historian P. Preston in his famous work The Spanish Holocaust. The scale of terror was exaggerated in the republican zone and, accordingly, understated in the Francoist zone. The study shows the failure of attempts to distort the anti-fascist nature of the war waged by the Spanish Republic relying on the support of the Soviet Union, Mexico, the progressive public of most civilized countries of that time, as well as attempts to present the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco in 1936–1939 as quite respectable. The new and updated critical versions of the Soviet aid to the Spanish Republic considered in the article are the result of the neoconservative wave in western historiography, which influenced representatives of both the classical historical school and the adherents of postmodernism.


2018 ◽  
pp. 97-130
Author(s):  
Denzenlkham Ulambayar

Since the 1990s, when previously classified and top secret Russian archival documents on the Korean War became open and accessible, it has become clear for post-communist countries that Kim Il Sung, Stalin and Mao Zedong were the primary organizers of the war. It is now equally certain that tensions arising from Soviet and American struggle generated the origins of the Korean War, namely the Soviet Union’s occupation of the northern half of the Korean peninsula and the United States’ occupation of the southern half to the 38th parallel after 1945 as well as the emerging bipolar world order of international relations and Cold War. Newly available Russian archival documents produced much in the way of new energies and opportunities for international study and research into the Korean War.2 However, within this research few documents connected to Mongolia have so far been found, and little specific research has yet been done regarding why and how Mongolia participated in the Korean War. At the same time, it is becoming today more evident that both Soviet guidance and U.S. information reports (evaluated and unevaluated) regarding Mongolia were far different from the situation and developments of that period. New examples of this tendency are documents declassified in the early 2000s and released publicly from the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in December 2016 which contain inaccurate information. The original, uncorrupted sources about why, how and to what degree the Mongolian People’s Republic (MPR) became a participant in the Korean War are in fact in documents held within the Mongolian Central Archives of Foreign Affairs. These archives contain multiple documents in relation to North Korea. Prior to the 1990s Mongolian scholars Dr. B. Lkhamsuren,3 Dr. B. Ligden,4 Dr. Sh. Sandag,5 junior scholar J. Sukhee,6 and A. A. Osipov7 mention briefly in their writings the history of relations between the MPR and the DPRK during the Korean War. Since the 1990s the Korean War has also briefly been touched upon in the writings of B. Lkhamsuren,8 D. Ulambayar (the author of this paper),9 Ts. Batbayar,10 J. Battur,11 K. Demberel,12 Balảzs Szalontai,13 Sergey Radchenko14 and Li Narangoa.15 There have also been significant collections of documents about the two countries and a collection of memoirs published in 200716 and 2008.17 The author intends within this paper to discuss particularly about why, how and to what degree Mongolia participated in the Korean War, the rumors and realities of the war and its consequences for the MPR’s membership in the United Nations. The MPR was the second socialist country following the Soviet Union (the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics) to recognize the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) and establish diplomatic ties. That was part of the initial stage of socialist system formation comprising the Soviet Union, nations in Eastern Europe, the MPR, the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and the DPRK. Accordingly between the MPR and the DPRK fraternal friendship and a framework of cooperation based on the principles of proletarian and socialist internationalism had been developed.18 In light of and as part of this framework, The Korean War has left its deep traces in the history of the MPR’s external diplomatic environment and state sovereignty


2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 127-137
Author(s):  
Tatsiana Hiarnovich

The paper explores the displace of Polish archives from the Soviet Union that was performed in 1920s according to the Riga Peace Treaty of 1921 and other international agreements. The aim of the research is to reconstruct the process of displace, based on the archival sources and literature. The object of the research is those documents that were preserved in the archives of Belarus and together with archives from other republics were displaced to Poland. The exploration leads to clarification of the selection of document fonds to be displaced, the actual process of movement and the explanation of the role that the archivists of Belarus performed in the history of cultural relationships between Poland and the Soviet Union. The articles of the Treaty of Riga had been formulated without taking into account the indivisibility of archive fonds that is one of the most important principles of restitution, which caused the failure of the treaty by the Soviet part.


Author(s):  
Victoria Smolkin

When the Bolsheviks set out to build a new world in the wake of the Russian Revolution, they expected religion to die off. Soviet power used a variety of tools—from education to propaganda to terror—to turn its vision of a Communist world without religion into reality. Yet even with its monopoly on ideology and power, the Soviet Communist Party never succeeded in overcoming religion and creating an atheist society. This book presents the first history of Soviet atheism from the 1917 revolution to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. The book argues that to understand the Soviet experiment, we must make sense of Soviet atheism. It shows how atheism was reimagined as an alternative cosmology with its own set of positive beliefs, practices, and spiritual commitments. Through its engagements with religion, the Soviet leadership realized that removing religion from the “sacred spaces” of Soviet life was not enough. Then, in the final years of the Soviet experiment, Mikhail Gorbachev—in a stunning and unexpected reversal—abandoned atheism and reintroduced religion into Soviet public life. The book explores the meaning of atheism for religious life, for Communist ideology, and for Soviet politics.


Author(s):  
A. James McAdams

This book is a sweeping history of one of the most significant political institutions of the modern world. The communist party was a revolutionary idea long before its supporters came to power. The book argues that the rise and fall of communism can be understood only by taking into account the origins and evolution of this compelling idea. It shows how the leaders of parties in countries as diverse as the Soviet Union, China, Germany, Yugoslavia, Cuba, and North Korea adapted the original ideas of revolutionaries like Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin to profoundly different social and cultural settings. The book is essential reading for anyone seeking to understand world communism and the captivating idea that gave it life.


Author(s):  
Vladislav Strutynsky

By analyzing one of the most eventful periods of the modern history of Poland, the early 80s of the XX century, the author examines the dynamics of social and political conflict on the eve of the introduction of martial law, which determines the location of the leading political forces in these events in Poland, that were grouped around the Polish United Labor Party and the Independent trade union «Solidarity», their governing structures and grassroots organizations, highlighting the development of socio-political situation in the country before entering the martial law on the 13th of December and analyzing the relation of the leading countries to the events, especially the Soviet Union. Also, the author distinguishes causes that prevent to reach the compromise in the process of realization different programs, that were offered to public and designed by PUWP and «Solidarity» and were “aimed” to help Polish society to exit an unprecedented conflict. This article provides a comparative analysis of the different analytical meaningful reasons, offered by historians, political scientists, lawyers, and led to the imposition of martial law in the Republic of Poland. The author also analyses the legality of such actions by the state and some conclusions that were reached by scientists, investigating the internal dynamics of the conflict and the process of implementation of tasks, that Polish United Workers’ Party (which ruled at that time) tried to solve with martial law and «Solidarity» was used as self-determination in Polish society. Keywords: Martial law, Independent trade union «Solidarity», inter-factory strike committee, social-political conflict, Polish United Workers’ Party, the Warsaw Pact, the Military Council of National Salvation


Author(s):  
Yuriy Makar

On December 22, 2017 the Ukrainian Diplomatic Service marked the 100thanniversary of its establishment and development. In dedication to such a momentous event, the Department of International Relations of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University has published a book of IR Dept’s ardent activity since its establishment. It includes information both in Ukrainian and English on the backbone of the collective and their versatile activities, achievements and prospects for the future. The author delves into retracing the course of the history of Ukrainian Diplomacy formation and development. The author highlights the roots of its formation, reconsidering a long way of its development that coincided with the formation of basic elements of Ukrainian statehood that came into existence as a result of the war of national liberation – the Ukrainian Central Rada (the Central Council of Ukraine). Later, the Ukrainian or so-called State the Hetmanate was under study. The Directorat (Directory) of Ukraine, being a provisional collegiate revolutionary state committee of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, was given a thorough study. Of particular interest for the research are diplomatic activities of the West Ukrainian People`s Republic. Noteworthy, the author emphasizes on the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic’s foreign policy, forced by the Bolshevist Russia. A further important implication is both the challenges of the Ukrainian statehood establishing and Ukraine’s functioning as a state, first and foremost, stemmed from the immaturity and conscience-unawareness of the Ukrainian society, that, ultimately, has led to the fact, that throughout the twentieth century Ukraine as a statehood, being incorporated into the Soviet Union, could hardly be recognized as a sovereign state. Our research suggests that since the beginning of the Ukrainian Diplomacy establishment and its further evolution, it used to be unprecedentedly fabricated and forged. On a wider level, the research is devoted to centennial fight of Ukraine against Russian violence and aggression since the WWI, when in 1917 the Russian Bolsheviks, headed by Lenin, started real Russian war against Ukraine. Apropos, in the about-a-year-negotiation run, Ukraine, eventually, failed to become sovereign. Remarkably, Ukraine finally gained its independence just in late twentieth century. Nowadays, Russia still regards Ukraine as a part of its own strategic orbit,waging out a carrot-and-stick battle. Keywords: The Ukrainian People’s Republic, the State of Ukraine, the Hetmanate, the Direcorat (Directory) of Ukraine, the West Ukrainian People`s Republic, the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic, Ukraine, the Bolshevist Russia, the Russian Federation, Ukrainian diplomacy


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document