August 3, 2018

THE INTERNATIONAL SITUATION - New Post-War Alignment


The New Post-War Alignment of Political Forces and the Formation of Two Camps:

Imperialist and Anti-Democratic, and Anti-Imperialist and Democratic The fundamental changes caused by the war in 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 become two major trends in post-war international policy, corresponding to the division of the political forces operating in 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 existence of the Attlee-Bevin Labour Government in Britain and the Ramadier Socialist Government in France does not hinder these countries from playing the part of satellites of the United States and following the lead of its imperialist policy on all major questions. 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 on 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-imperialist and 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 impe- rialism and have firmly set foot on the path of democratic development, such as Rumania, Hungary and Finland. Indonesia and Viet Nam are associated with it; it has the sympathy of India, Egypt and Syria. The anti-imperialist camp is backed by the labour and democratic movement and by the fraternal Communist parties in all countries, by the fighter 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 the victory over fascism. In the ac- complishment of this fundamental task of the post-war 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 creat-ing the most favourable conditions for the building of a Communist society. One of these conditions is external peace. As the embodiment of a new and superior social system, the Soviet Union reflects in its foreign policy the aspirations of progressive mankind, which desires enduring peace and has nothing to gain from a new war hatched by capitalism. The Soviet Union is a staunch champion of the 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 in the international arena.

All the forces of the anti-imperialist and anti-fascist camp are united in the effort to secure a just and democratic peace. It is this united effort that has brought about and strengthened friendly co-operation between the U.S.S.R. and the democratic countries on all questions of foreign policy. These countries, and in the first place the new democracies—Yugoslavia, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Albania, which played a big part in the war of liberation from fascism, as well as Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary and to some extent Finland, which have joined the anti- fascist front—have proved themselves in the post-war period staunch defenders of peace, democracy and their own liberty and independence against all attempts on the part of the United States and Great Britain to turn them back in their course and to bring them again under the imperialist yoke.

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, Brit- ish and American reactionary circles did not venture to come out openly against the Soviet Un- ion 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 legiti- mate interests of the Soviet Union and the democratic countries at the Potsdam tripartite confer- ence, in July1945.

The foreign policy of the Soviet Union and the democratic countries in these two past years has been a policy of consistently working for the observance of democratic principles in the post-war settlement. The countries of the anti-imperialist camp have loyally and consistently striven for the implementation of these principles, without deviating from them one iota. Conse- quently, the major objective of the post-war foreign policy of the democratic states has been a democratic peace, the eradication of the vestiges of fascism and the prevention of a resurgence of fascist imperialist aggression, the recognition of the principle of the equality of nations and re-spect for their sovereignty, and a general reduction of all armaments and the outlawing of the most destructive weapons, those designed for the mass slaughter of the civilian population. In their effort to secure these objectives, Soviet diplomacy and the diplomacy of the democratic countries met with the resistance of Anglo-American diplomacy, which since the war has persis- tently and unswervingly striven for the rejection of the general principles of the post-war settle- ment proclaimed by the Allies during the war, and to replace the policy of peace and consolida- tion of democracy by a new policy, a policy aiming at violating general peace, protecting fascist elements, and persecuting democracy in all countries.

Of immense importance are the joint efforts of the diplomacy of the U.S.S.R. and the other democratic countries to secure a reduction of armaments and the outlawing of the most de- structive 
of them—the atomic bomb.

On the initiative of the Soviet Union, a resolution was moved in the United Nations call- ing for a general reduction of armaments and the recognition, as a primary task, of the necessity to prohibit the production and use of atomic energy for warlike purposes. This motion of the Soviet government was fiercely resisted by the United States and Great Britain. All the efforts of the imperialist elements were concentrated on sabotaging this decision by erecting endless and fruitless obstacles and barriers, with the object of preventing the adoption of any effective practical measures. The activities of the delegates of the U.S.S.R. and the other democratic countries in the agencies of the United Nations bear the character of a systematic, stubborn, day-to-day struggle for democratic principles of international co-operation, for the exposure of the intrigues of the imperialist plotters against the peace and security of the nations.

This was very graphically demonstrated, for example, in the discussion of the situation on Greece’s northern frontiers. The Soviet Union and Poland vigorously objected to the Security Council being used as a means of discrediting Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania, who arc falsely accused by the imperialists of aggressive acts against Greece.

Soviet foreign policy proceeds from the premise that the two systems—capitalism and Socialism—will exist side by side for a long time. From this it follows that co-operation between the U.S.S.R. and countries with other systems is possible, provided that the principle of reciproc- ity is observed and that obligations once assumed are honoured. Everyone knows that theU.S.S.R. has always honoured the obligations it has assumed. The Soviet Union has demon- strated its will and desire for co-operation.

Britain and America are pursuing the very opposite policy in the United Nations. They are doing everything they can to renounce their commitments and to secure a free hand for the prosecution of a new policy, a policy which envisages not co-operation among the nations, but the hounding of one against the other, violation of the rights and interests of democratic nations, and the isolation of the U.S.S.R.

Soviet policy follows the line of maintaining loyal, good-neighbour relations with all states that display the desire for co-operation. As to the countries that are its genuine friends and allies, the Soviet Union has always behaved, and will always behave, as their true friend and ally. Soviet foreign policy envisages a further extension of friendly aid by the Soviet Union to these countries.

Soviet foreign policy, defending the cause of peace, discountenances a policy of venge- ance towards the vanquished countries.

We know that the U.S.S.R. is in favour of a united, peace-loving, demilitarized and democratic Germany. Comrade Stalin formulated the Soviet policy towards Germany when he said: “In short, the policy of the Soviet Union on the German question reduces itself to the de- militarization and democratization of Germany…. The demilitarization and democratization of Germany form one of the most important guarantees for the establishment of a stable and lasting peace.” However, this policy of the Soviet Union towards Germany is encountering frantic oppo- sition from the imperialist circles in the United States and Great Britain.

The meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers in Moscow in March and April 1947 demonstrated that the United States, Great Britain and France are prepared not only to prevent the democratic reconstruction and demilitarization of Germany, but even to liquidate her as an integral state, to dismember her, and to settle the question of peace separately.

Today this policy is being conducted under new conditions, now that America has aban- doned the old course of Roosevelt and is passing to a new policy, a policy of preparing for new military adventures.