The Soviet Union and the Middle East: The Post-World War II Era. Edited by Ivo J. Lederer and Wayne S. Vucinich. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1974. xii, 302 pp. $9.95.

Slavic Review ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-401
Author(s):  
O. M. Smolansky
1976 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 525
Author(s):  
Richard M. Brace ◽  
Ivo J. Lederer ◽  
Wayne S. Vucinich

1975 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 222
Author(s):  
Hafez F. Farmayan ◽  
Ivo J. Lederer ◽  
Wayne S. Vucinich

1975 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 1369
Author(s):  
Mary Kilbourne Matossian ◽  
Ivo J. Lederer ◽  
Wayne S. Vucinich

Author(s):  
David Blitz

<p>Russell's statements in the immediate post-World War II period about war with the Soviet Union have generated considerable controversy. Some commentators interpret his declarations as if he advocated a preventive war against the Soviet Union. To the contrary, Russell advanced a strategy of conditional threat of war with the aim not of provoking war, but of preventing it. However, Russell was unable to satisfy his critics. Despite initial accuracy in his restatements of what he had originally said, Russell erred in later affirmations, lending credence to the erroneous view that he had something to hide.</p>


Slavic Review ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 341-362
Author(s):  
Elvira Churyumova ◽  
Edward C. Holland

Based on interview files and archival materials, this paper reconstructs the experiences of Kalmyk displaced persons (DPs) against the backdrop of the shifting international refugee regime in post-World War II Europe. Kalmyks came to western Europe in two waves: at the conclusion of the Russian Civil War in 1920 and during the German retreat from the Soviet Union in 1943–44. After the war, the majority of Kalmyks were repatriated; those who remained in Europe primarily ended up in DP camps in the American zone of western Germany. This paper details the strategies used by Kalmyk DPs to avoid repatriation to the Soviet Union and eventually secure resettlement in the United States in 1951. Individual histories offer insight into how the Kalmyks as a group made themselves legible to the international community in light of a changing geopolitical environment and evolving racial regimes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-702
Author(s):  
Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet

In 1946, the entertainer and activist Paul Robeson pondered America's intentions in Iran. In what was to become one of the first major crises of the Cold War, Iran was fighting a Soviet aggressor that did not want to leave. Robeson posed the question, “Is our State Department concerned with protecting the rights of Iran and the welfare of the Iranian people, or is it concerned with protecting Anglo-American oil in that country and the Middle East in general?” This was a loaded question. The US was pressuring the Soviet Union to withdraw its troops after its occupation of the country during World War II. Robeson wondered why America cared so much about Soviet forces in Iranian territory, when it made no mention of Anglo-American troops “in countries far removed from the United States or Great Britain.” An editorial writer for a Black journal in St. Louis posed a different variant of the question: Why did the American secretary of state, James F. Byrnes, concern himself with elections in Iran, Arabia or Azerbaijan and yet not “interfere in his home state, South Carolina, which has not had a free election since Reconstruction?”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document