scholarly journals Iraq's official position on political developments in Iran (1941-1945)

2017 ◽  
Vol 223 (1) ◽  
pp. 399-422
Author(s):  
M. Shaheen Siham Abdel Razzaq
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Economic Recession ◽  
The United States ◽  
Official Position ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Ministry ◽  
Us Intervention ◽  
Second World

The events that took place in Iran during the second world war are considered an important item for Iraqi diplomacy and follow-up by the Foreign Ministry in Iraq. On the other hand, this Iraqi diplomacy was considered to be quite flexible when a reshuffle occurred. It was looking for its causes and  linking them, and then adopting accurate scenarios to protect its interests. Iraq was not far from what was happening in Iran .When Mohammad Reza Pahlavi took power in Iran, The oil conflict has also existed. In addition to Iran's strategic position, making US intervention clear. Which prompted Iran to build an intimate relationship with the United States and strengthen its relations in all respects, especially when Ahmed assigned the strength of the Sultanate to form the ministry on the ninth of August 1924 and consider America a third force used by Ahmed Qawam as a bargaining chip to confront the British and Soviet Union in the region. After the issue of oil emerged on the political scene and at that time, the Iranian government took a deep breath in the embrace of the United States. In fact, Reza Shah Pahlawi inherited a backward country, especially in the economic field. He tried to reform the country's economic recession and make Iran to acquire a new stage, and the result of foreign demand for Iranian oil led to widespread reactions at the internal level and became pro-Western groups to reject the Soviet demand and solidarity with the independent. While the Iranian Communist Party (Toda Party) supported the request and held demonstrations for the immediate admission of the Soviet Union

America Abroad

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kal Raustiala
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
Political Role ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The World ◽  
Second World

The single most important feature of American history after 1945 was the United States’s assumption of hegemonic leadership. Europeans had noted America’s enormous potential since at least the nineteenth century. After the Civil War the United States had one of the largest economies in the world, but, as noted earlier in this book, in geopolitical terms it remained a surprisingly minor player. By 1900 the United States was playing a more significant political role. But it was only after 1945 that the nation’s potential on the world stage was fully realized. Victory in the Second World War left the United States in an enviable position. Unlike the Soviet Union, which endured devastating fighting on its territory and lost tens of millions of citizens, the United States had experienced only one major attack on its soil. Thanks to its actions in the war America had great influence in Europe. And the national economy emerged surprisingly vibrant from the years of conflagration, easily dominant over any conceivable rival or set of rivals. When the First World War ended the United States ultimately chose to return to its hemispheric perch. It declined to join the new League of Nations, and rather than maintaining engagement with the great powers of the day, America generally turned inward. The years following the Second World War were quite different. In addition to championing—and hosting—the new United Nations, the United States quickly established a panoply of important institutions aimed at maintaining and organizing international cooperation in both economic and security affairs. Rising tensions with the Soviet Union, apparent to many shortly after the war’s end, led the United States to remain militarily active in both Europe and Asia. The intensifying Cold War cemented this unprecedented approach to world politics. The prolonged occupations of Germany and Japan were straightforward examples of this newly active global role. In both cases the United States refashioned a conquered enemy into a democratic, free-market ally—a significant feat. The United States did not, however, seek a formal empire in the wake of its victory.

scholarly journals Friends – of a Kind: America and its Allies in the Second World War Mary E. Glantz, FDR and the Soviet Union: The President's Battles Over Foreign Policy (Lawrence: Kansas University Press, 2005, $34.95). Pp. 253. ISBN 0 7006 1365 X. Steven Merritt Miner, Stalin's Holy War: Religion, Nationalism and Alliance Politics, 1941–1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003, $55.00). Pp. 407. ISBN 0 8078 2736 3. Mark A. Stoler, Allies in War: Britain and American Against the Axis Powers 1940–1945 (London and New York: Hodder Arnold, 2005, £25.00). Pp. 291. ISBN 0 340 72026 3. David Stone, War Summits: The Meetings that Shaped World War II and the Postwar World (Washington, DC: Potomac Books, 2005, $29.95). Pp. 304. ISBN 1 57488 901 X.

2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-644
Author(s):  
MARTIN H. FOLLY
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Second World

The Second World War continues to be an attractive subject for scholars and even more so for those writing for a general readership. One of the more traditional areas of focus has been the ‘Big Three’ – the alliance of the United States with Britain and the Soviet Union. Public interest in the three leaders – Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin – remains high, and their decisions continue to resonate in the post-Cold War era, as demonstrated by continued (and often ahistorical) references to the decisions made at the Yalta Conference. Consequently, while other aspects of Second World War historiography have pushed into new avenues of exploration, that which has looked at the Grand Alliance has followed fairly conventional lines – the new Soviet bloc materials have been trawled to answer old questions and using the frames of reference that developed during the Cold War. This has left much to be said about the nature of the relationship of the United States with its great allies and the dynamics and processes of that alliance, and overlooked full and rounded analysis of the role of that alliance as the instrument of Axis defeat.

scholarly journals The Attitude of the Soviet Union of the War in the Korean Semi-Continental during the years 1950-1953 (A Documentary Study)

2018 ◽  
Vol 219 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Dr .Ayad Tariq Khudier Al-Alwani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
United State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Second World

      This research deals with the attitude of the Soviet Union of the war the Korean Semi –Continental during  the years 1950  - 1953. It also treats the historical matters of the Korean issue which is considered one of the most important forms of the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States; especially that the strategic spot that distinguished the Korean Semi- Continental had stimulated the great countries such as China and Japan to control the Semi- Continental .Besides the attempts of both the United States and the Soviet Union to exend their leverage to the areas they had controlled after the Second World War; of what led to obstruction of appearance of a united state in the peninsula; therefore Korea had been divided into two parts and Latitude 38 had been put as a separate border between them.

The Present Tragedy of America

Worldview ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 14-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Morgenthau
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Hungarian Revolution ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Soviet Foreign Policy ◽  
Moral Crisis ◽  
Second World

It is, of course, trivial to say that the foreign policy of the United States is not only in a political and military crisis — and financial crisis you might add — but also in a moral crisis. This moral crisis has particular significance for the United States. Take, by way of contrast, the moral crises through which Soviet foreign policy has passed since the end of the second world war. Take, for instance, the moral crisis which it faced in consequence of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, and the moral crisis it is still facing by virtue of its invasion of Czechoslovakia last year. Obviously those crises considerably decreased the prestige and influence of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union has emerged from tbose crises as something different from what it was before. For the Soviet Union today can no longer claim to be the fatherland of socialism, the disinterested vanguard of the international proletariat.

From the Second World to Global South?

2020 ◽  
pp. 46-66
Author(s):  
Ellen A. Ahlness
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Political Development ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
Second World

Tajikistan has experienced numerous barriers to economic and political development over the past 100 years. Pressured into joining the Soviet Union, which lasted nearly 70 years, Tajikistan sank into a civil war upon achieving its independence. This resulted in numerous deaths, displacement, and infrastructural devastation. Since the conflict, Tajikistan has experienced tremendous economic growth and positive social developments; however, Western media overwhelmingly focuses on isolated incidences of violence and socioeconomic trends that casts Tajikistan in a negative light. This also creates a “horn effect” that frames the Tajik socioeconomic situation as underdeveloped and lacking freedoms. A narrative analysis of stories on Tajikistan from the United States' top 10 news outlets from 1998 to 2018 portrays unrepresentative and paternal pictures of Tajikistan's political, economic, and social developments.

Russian Emigration and the USA. F. Stepun and M.M. Karpovich (Preface to the Publication of Letters from F.A. Stepun to M.M. Karpovich)

2021 ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Vladimir K. Кantor ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Eastern Bloc ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Second World

The author examines a geopolitical line in the development of Russian philoso­phy in emigration. Not only the Russian revolution of 1917, not only the Nazi revolution of 1933–1935, but the Second World War changed the balance of power on the intellectual map of the world. Hitler was defeated by the Soviet Union with the help of the Anglo-American allies. As a result, two blocks emerged. They got a taste for the disposal of Europe and other countries of the United States, the USSR also strengthened, expanding the area of its influence (“Eastern bloc”). Should emigrants return to Russia? Bunin tried, but at the bor­der he turned back after reading articles about Akhmatova and Zoshchenko in the Pravda newspaper. Remain in a devastated and half-starved Europe, which has no time for emigrants? Or choose the third path where the track has al­ready been paved. Russian intellectuals from Germany have already settled in the United States, many have taken root there, some have returned. This, in essence, was the second emigration, the continuation of the first. There was already an experience of flight, but there was also a craving for German culture, which, despite the German Nazism sweeping through the world, Russian thinkers highly valued. They – as it should be in trouble – held on to each other. An example of this intellectual collaboration is Karpovich and Stepun.

Gender, Demobilization, and the Reordering of Societies after the First and Second World Wars

2020 ◽  
pp. 584-610
Author(s):  
Karen Hagemann
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Social Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Economic Problems ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Second World

As industrialized total wars, the First and Second World Wars required the unprecedented involvement of civilians. After both wars had ended, the demobilization of large numbers of soldiers, medical staff and workers, the care for invalid veterans, war widows and orphans, and the relocation of millions of prisoners of war, displaced persons, expellees and refugees created immense political, social, and economic problems and challenges for the postwar societies, which also had to deal with the costs and wounds of war. This chapter explores the economic, social, and cultural demobilization and the reordering of societies after the First and Second World Wars with a gender perspective and focusses Britain, France, Germany, the Soviet Union, and the United States. With these belligerents, victorious and defeated nations, market-based and communist societies, and democratic and authoritarian political systems can be compared. The chapter demonstrates the importance of the gender relations for the reconstruction of the postwar social order. After both wars, in all these societies, despite their differences, it was mainly the families, particularly the women, who had to heal the wounds of war.

Optimists and pessimists about nuclear arms

1987 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-161
Author(s):  
Dan Keohane
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Second World ◽  
Nuclear Arms

Since the end of the Second World War, the United States and the Soviet Union have engaged in an intense and often deeply hostile contest for predominance in the international system. The dedication by each superpower of its most valued technological, engineering and economic resources first to acquiring and thereafter to ceaselessly enhancing a comprehensive inventory of nuclear arms, is an especially prominent and important manifestation of USA-USSR rivalry.

Target Enormoz: Soviet Nuclear Espionage on the West Coast of the United States, 1942–1950

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 68-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregg Herken
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Definitive Answer ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
American Physicist ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Second World

Alexander Vassiliev's notebooks fill in long-standing gaps in historians' understanding of Soviet nuclear espionage in the western United States during the Second World War and Cold War. Scholars are, in effect, finally able to see some of the most notorious spy cases in modern history from the Soviet side. The notebooks exonerate some individuals who were accused of spying—and whose careers were ruined as a result—while confirming the guilt of others. These revelations include an arguably definitive answer to a question that has been the centerpiece of Cold War controversy for more than half a century: whether the renowned American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer was, as alleged at the time, “an agent of the Soviet Union.” The new evidence indicates that he was not a spy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document