Soviet Aid to the Spanish Republic in 1936–1939: Modern Conservative Versions

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.

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 963-971
Author(s):  
K. V. Yumatov ◽  
K. N. Sivina

The research featured the history of the interstate relations between Azerbaijan and the Republic of Turkey, its main stages and issues, as well as its dependence on various internal political changes and political figures. What began as an internal conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan during Perestroika in the Soviet Union grew into an interstate affair, which currently involves the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The author believes that the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh after the military conflict of 2020 is an important part in historical and political studies on the Azerbaijan – Turkey relations. Initially, Turkey took a pro-Azerbaijani position in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. However, its negative attitude to Armenia put it on the periphery of the peacekeeping process in the OSCE Minsk Group. Guided by the ideology of "one people, two countries", Turkey helped Azerbaijan to overcome the political and economic crisis in the 1990s, as well as to lobby its interests in the UN, the NATO, the OSCE, and the OIC. In 2020, Erdogan’s expansionist policy allowed Azerbaijan to regain most territories annexed by Armenia during the Karabakh war in the 1990s.


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):  
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):  
Catherine Andreyev

After a long period of scholarly neglect, owing partly to political reasons, the Second World War is now being studied as an integral part of the history of the Soviet Union. This chapter considers the war’s far reaching effects on state and society, taking a multi-faceted, comparative view. Beginning with German and Soviet war aims, the chapter goes on to highlight recent historiography, which has revealed much about the experience of the individual Soviet soldier and has emphasized that by concentrating on military set-pieces, such as the battle of Stalingrad, we risk distorting our understanding of the war. Also discussed are controversial subjects such as collaboration and partisan warfare, and the impact of the war on the Russian Orthodox Church and on Russian national identity.


2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 575-597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew H. Ciscel

The politics of language identity have figured heavily in the history of the people of the Republic of Moldova. Indeed the region's status as a province of Russia, Romania, and then the Soviet Union over the past 200 years has consistently been justified and, at least partially, manipulated on the basis of language issues. At the center of these struggles over language and power has been the linguistic and cultural identity of the region's autochthonous ethnicity and current demographic majority, the Moldovans. In dispute is the degree to which these Moldovans are culturally, historically, and linguistically related to the other Moldovans and Romanians across the Prut River in Romania. Under imperial Russia from 1812 to 1918 and Soviet Russia from 1944 to 1991, a proto-Moldovan identity that eschewed connections to Romania and emphasized contact with Slavic peoples was promoted in the region. Meanwhile, experts from Romania and the West have regularly argued that the eastern Moldovans are indistinguishable, historically, culturally, and linguistically, from their Romanian cousins.


Author(s):  
Peter Geschiere

The renewed relevance of “autochthony” and similar notions of belonging in many parts of Africa is symptomatic of the confusing changes on the continent since the “post-Cold War moment.” Africa is certainly not exceptional in this respect. The “new world order,” so triumphantly announced by President George H. W. Bush in 1990 after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the apparent victory of capitalism turned out to be marked by intensifying global flows, as expected, but also by an increasing obsession with belonging all over the globe, which was less expected. Yet, it may be important to emphasize as well that this upsurge of struggles over local belonging took on special aspects in Africa. The notion of autochthony has its own history on the continent, going back to the impact of colonialism, but building on older distinctions. However, it always sat uneasily with what many historians and anthropologists see as characteristic for African social formations: a heavy emphasis on mobility and inclusion of people: wealth in people. Since the last decades of the 20th century, there seems to be an increasing closure of local communities in many parts of the continent: a growing emphasis on exclusion rather than inclusion of newcomers, immigrants, or “strangers.” After a brief sketch of the history of autochthony on the continent, also in relation to parallel notions like ethnicity and indigeneity, the focus is placed on the factors behind such a tendency toward closure: increasing land scarcity, and especially the changing global context since 1990. In many parts of the continent, the neo-liberal twin of democratization and decentralization had the effect that the feeling of belonging to the village became of crucial importance again, as well for people who had already lived for generations in the cities. The implications of such a growing preoccupation with autochthony and local belonging for national citizenship and notions on civil society are highly variable and depend on historical context. However, one recurrent trait is the paradox between a promise of basic security (how can one belong more than if one is rooted in the soil?) and a practice of deep uncertainty. The receding quality of these claims to belong—autochthony as a basic denial of history, which always implies movement—allows that they always can be contested: One’s autochthony can always be unmasked as “fake,” with someone else belonging more. Autochthony can be institutionalized in various forms and to various degrees, but its basic uncertainty gives it a violent potential.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-32
Author(s):  
Anne E. Hasselmann

In the wake of the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, Soviet museum curators began to establish a museal depiction of the war. This article analyzes these early beginnings of Soviet war commemoration and the curtailing of its surprising heterogeneity in late Stalinism. Historical research has largely ignored the impact of Soviet museum workers (muzeishchiki) on the evolution of Russian war memory. Archival material from the Red Army Museum, now renamed the Central Museum of the Armed Forces, in Moscow and the Belarus Museum of the History of the Great Patriotic War in Minsk documents the unfolding of locally specific war exhibitions which stand in stark contrast to the later homogenized official Soviet war narrative. Yet war memory was not created unilaterally by the curators. Visitors also participated in its making, as the museum guestbooks demonstrate. As “sites of commemoration and learning,” early Soviet war exhibitions reveal the agency of the muzeishchiki and the involvement of the visitors in the “small events” of memory creation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 213-239
Author(s):  
Aleksander Głogowski

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE MILITARY AND CIVIL UNDERGROUND IN THE VILNIUS REGION IN 1939-1941 The first years of the occupation of the Vilnius Region were an unusual period in terms of the history of the Polish Underground State and the Polish armed resistance movement. This area was occupied after September 17, 1939 by the Soviet Union, but part of it was transferred to the Republic of Lithuania, along with which it was re-incorporated into the Soviet Union. The Lithuanian occupation was a considerable challenge both for the Polish authorities in exile and for the inhabitants of the Vilnius Region. Meeting such a challenge required certain diplomatic talents (not to worsen the situation of Poles living in this area) as well as knowledge of the relations in the area, which was a problem for the Polish authorities in France, and especially in Great Britain. The Polish inhabitants of the Vilnius Region considered the legal status of their land to be illegal occupation, while the Lithuanians claimed that thanks to a new agreement with the USSR, the period of occupation of these lands by Poles ended. These opinions, together with the mutual resentments and stereotypes flourishing for nearly 20 years, made the peaceful coexistence of two nations difficult, or even impossible. The government of the Republic of Poland tried to prevent the attempts to start an anti-Lithuanian uprising, not wanting to provoke the other two occupiers into military intervention. To this stage, it sought an intermediate solution between the abandonment of any conspiracy (which carried the threat of forming armed groups beyond the control of the legal Polish authorities) and its development on a scale known, for example, from the German or Soviet occupation. The Vilnius Region was to become the personnel and organisational base for the latter. The dilemma was resolved without Polish participation at the time of the annexation of the Republic of Lithuania by the Soviets. Then the second period of the Soviet occupation began, characterised by much greater brutality than the first one, with mass arrests, executions and deportations. The policy of repression primarily affected the pre-war military staff and their families, who were the natural base for the resistance movement of the intelligentsia. Fortunately, this process ended at the time of the German aggression against the USSR. Those that survived the period of the “second Soviet invasion” could in the new conditions continue their underground activities and prepare for an armed uprising in the circumstances and in the manner indicated by the Home Army Headquarters and the Polish Government in London.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document