the issues of the 2nd Front, early Cold War

Report on the International Situation to the Cominform
Andrei Zhdanov, September 22, 1947
________________________________________

The fundamental changes caused by the war on the international scene and in the position of individual countries has entirely changed the political landscape of the world. A new alignment of political forces has arisen. The more the war recedes into the past, the more distinct becomes two major trends in postwar international policy, corresponding to the division of the political forces operating on the international arena into two major camps: the imperialist and anti-democratic camp, on the one hand, and the anti-imperialist and democratic camp, on the other. The principal driving force of the imperialist camp is the U.S.A. Allied with it are Great Britain and France. ... The imperialist camp is also supported by colony-owning countries, such as Belgium and Holland, by countries with reactionary anti-democratic regimes, such as Turkey and Greece, and by countries politically and economically dependent upon the United States, such as the Near Eastern and South American countries and China.
The cardinal purpose of the imperialist camp is to strengthen imperialism, to hatch a new imperialist war, to combat socialism and democracy, and to support reactionary and anti-democratic pro-fascist regimes and movements everywhere.
In the pursuit of these ends the imperialist camp is prepared to rely on reactionary and anti-democratic forces in all countries, and to support its former adversaries in the war against its wartime allies.
The anti-fascist forces comprise the second camp. This camp is based on the U.S.S.R. and the new democracies. It also includes countries that have broken with imperialism and have firmly set foot on the path of democratic development, such as Rumania, Hungary and Finland. Indonesia and Vietnam are associated with it; it has the sympathy of India, Egypt and Syria. The anti-imperialist camp is backed by the labor and democratic movement and by the fraternal Communist parties in all countries, by the fighters for national liberation in the colonies and dependencies, by all progressive and democratic forces in every country. The purpose of this camp is to resist the threat of new wars and imperialist expansion, to strengthen democracy and to extirpate the vestiges of fascism.
The end of the Second World War confronted all the freedom-loving nations with the cardinal task of securing a lasting democratic peace sealing victory over fascism. In the accomplishment of this fundamental task of the postwar period the Soviet Union and its foreign policy are playing a leading role. This follows from the very nature of the Soviet socialist state, to which motives of aggression and exploitation are utterly alien, and which is interested in creating the most favorable conditions for the building of a communist society. One of these conditions is external peace. As embodiment of a new and superior social system, the Soviet Union reflects in its foreign policy the aspirations of progressive mankind, which desires lasting peace and has nothing to gain from a new war hatched by capitalism. The Soviet Union is a staunch champion of liberty and independence of all nations, and a foe of national and racial oppression and colonial exploitation in any shape or form. The change in the general alignment of forces between the capitalist world and the socialist world brought about by the war has still further enhanced the significance of the foreign policy of the Soviet state and enlarged the scope of its activity on the international arena.
The successes and the growing international prestige of the democratic camp were not to the liking of the imperialists. Even while World War II was still on, reactionary forces in Great Britain and the United States became increasingly active, striving to prevent concerted action by the Allied powers, to protract the war, to bleed the U.S.S.R., and to save the fascist aggressors from utter defeat. The sabotage of the Second Front by the Anglo-Saxon imperialists, headed by Churchill, was a clear reflection of this tendency, which was in point of fact a continuation of the Munich policy in the new and changed conditions. But while the war was still in progress British and American reactionary circles did not venture to come out openly against the Soviet Union and the democratic countries, realizing that they had the undivided sympathy of the masses all over the world. But in the concluding months of the war the situation began to change. The British and American imperialists already manifested their unwillingness to respect the legitimate interests of the Soviet Union and the democratic countries at the Potsdam tripartite conference in July 1945. Questions.

1. Explain fully lines 42-47 of the Document. 6 marks
2. According to the Document, when did “British and American reactionary circles” openly begin to criticize their former ally? Use your own knowledge to explain why he may have chosen that date. 4 marks.

1.This document probably written by a Russian man, two years after the end of the end of the World War II, it's a clear example of Soviet ideological propaganda that dominated the post second War World era.

In this line of soviet thinking we can observe that the soviets considered themselves as a democratic country and named the American and the English/British as capitalists and imperialists countries. This philosophical doctrine of the soviet misinformation it's particular evident in lines 42-47.
In fact the text let us believe that the Allies (USA and Britain) intentionally extended the war longer that it was necessary, although allegedly they could used more military force during the offensive to finished it earlier. Again, supposedly this decision had the objective of weakening USSR with a protracted war.
Also in the soviet point of view, the Anglo-Saxon did not apply a final blow to the Italians (the fascists), though they forget to mention that the Italians changed sides after it´s defeat in 1943 and their soldiers were instructed to lay down their arms (the dictator Mussolini went into hiding and was eventually hung by Italian partisans).
Additionally they also accuse their former Allies of betrayal by not using all their power in the second front (the west front located across France). Once again the author argues that the Anglo-Saxons wanted to damage as much as they could the USSR.
The text also blames the allies of repeating the same mistake that they had done in the Munich Agreement, which basically consisted in the appeasement of the Nazis. In this regard the essayist states that the Germans weren't harmed as they were supposed to by the end of the war due to the fact that the allies didn't want to hurt them too much.
In sum the article illustrates that much of Soviet propaganda was based on a distortion of reality in order to justify their own actions.

2. According to the document it was during the Postdam Conference that the Americans in particular but also the British started to give stronger messages to the Soviets. The reasons for this position are complex but understandable, basically they were already thinking about post-war world and were also very apprehensive about Soviet posture.

In fact the Anglo-Saxon observed that the soviets had their own interests and wanted to expand their influence. Ironically Stalin troops stayed in the Countries from which themselves had fought in order to expel the Nazis and free the occupied lands, in other words the soviets were on one side liberating countries from the Nazis and on the other side were occupying them. This way Stalin’s army occupied a significant portion of Europe, with Stalin justifying that his control of Eastern Europe was a defensive measure against possible future attacks.
Other reason for the rougher speech was due to the fact that America had a new President, Truman, who was much more anti communist than his predecessor Roosevelt and at the same time was also very suspicious of Stalin.
Nevertheless in the Conference there were other disagreements, namely what to do: i) about Germany; ii) over reparations; iii) over the soviet policy in the Eastern Europe.
Finally we can not underestimate the fact the Potsdam Conference was held in July 1945, and by that time American hold a huge trump: recently they had successfully tested atomic bombs. Therefore, they used this advantage in the negotiations with the USSR knowing that had enough power to safely harden their official communications.