scholarly journals Decolonization of Cyprus and position of the Soviet Union (1953-1959(

2020 ◽  
pp. 42-56
Author(s):  
Argyrios Tasoulas
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
British Colonialism ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
British Military ◽  
Military Facilities ◽  
Of Greece

This article examines the process of decolonization of Cyprus and support of the Soviet Union in the struggle against British colonialism. The author substantiates why the case of Cyprus deserves special attention, and how its national characteristics alongside other factors, including the position of Great Britain, Greece, and Turkey impacted decolonization process of the island. It is underlined that the Soviet policy in support of national identity of the Cypriots, as demonstrated by diplomatic steps in the United Nations Security Council in 1954-1958, pursued two directions: weakening of British positions in the Eastern Mediterranean, and initiation of a split in relations between the two NATO members – Greece and Turkey, using their national interests in Cyprus. The unpublished Greek and Soviet materials served as methodological framework for this research. The author leans on the archival foreign policy materials of the Russian Federation, diplomatic and foreign policy archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Greece, as well as the Foundation of the Prime Minister of Greece Konstantinos Karamanlis. The use of vast array of sources on the three languages dedicated to the topic allowed concluding that the tactics of the Soviet Union pertinent to Cyprus question of 1953-1959, was ineffective, since the gap between Greece and Turkey and NATO has been overcome after signing the Cyprus Agreements of 1959. A sovereign Cyprus State within the framework of the Non-Aligned Movement, and political protection of the Cypriot Communists (the strongest Communist Party in the region), would be the best way for ensuring Soviet security, since these subjects could control the use of the British military facilities, and thus, expand Soviet influence in the region.

scholarly journals “Bread for the People and National Security”: Soviet commercial diplomacy during the period of détente

2021 ◽  
pp. 103-119
Author(s):  
Dar'ya Viktorovna Yakupova ◽  
Roman Aleksandrovich Yakupov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People

The relevance of this research is defined by the need for analyzing the historical experience of adaptation of foreign economic activity of the Soviet State to the challenges of Western policy deterrence, the imperatives of which are being applied to Russia in the current context. The subject of this research is the Soviet grain procurement crisis and foreign policy ways for its overcoming. The object of this research is trade and diplomatic relations between the Soviet Union and the United States. The scientific novelty lies in elaboration of the concept of “commercial diplomacy” – the foreign economic activity of the USSR government aimed at solution of the domestic problems and tasks of modernization. Leaning on the newly introduced sources, the conclusion is made that the policy of commercial diplomacy implemented by the Soviet Union suggested the use of international dialogue within the framework of cooperation between the governments and public-private business circles on achieving the economic goals associated with the national interests of the Soviet Union. The critical need for grain procurement, discovery of the oil resources potential, and détente in the international relations between the two superpowers led to a new round in the Soviet Union – United States relations. It is underlined that grain and oil manifested as the factor of maintaining domestic political stability and the object of foreign policy exchange. The article answers the question: how the grain procurement problem has transformed from the economic into social issue, and the grain import has become the vulnerable spot of the Soviet Union in the ideological confrontation with the United States, and the object of international relations.

scholarly journals Cooperation of the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the Belarusian SSR in the UN during the Perestroika Period

2021 ◽  
pp. 113-140
Author(s):  
Uladzimir Snapkouski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Specialized Institutions ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Foreign Ministers ◽  
Foreign Ministry ◽  
Soviet Historiography

The article examines the main directions of activity and forms of interaction between the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the Belarusian SSR in the UN and its specialized institutions during the years of perestroika (1985 - 1991). To disclose the topic, materials from the journal “International Affair” were used (reviews of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the foreign policy of the USSR, articles by the foreign ministers of the Union republics, primarily Ukraine and Belarus), book and journal publications of Union / Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian scientists, documents of the United Nations and foreign policy of the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the Belarusian SSR. The author’s conscious emphasis on the union level reflects the real situation in relations between the Union Center and the republics in the Soviet federation during the perestroika period, when these relations rapidly evolved from the foreign policy dictate of the Center to greater autonomy of the republics in the international arena, which ultimately has led to the collapse of the USSR and the proclamation of independence all union republics. The article analyzes such issues as the new approach of the Soviet Union to the UN in the years of perestroika, the formation of new relations between the Union republics and the Center, diplomatic cooperation of Soviet delegations and representatives of socialist countries in the UN, Belarusian initiatives at the 45th session of the UN General Assembly (1990). During the years of perestroika, the Soviet leadership and the union Foreign Ministry did a tremendous job of clearing the rubble of the Cold War, developing broad international cooperation and integration the USSR into the world economy. The Belarusian and Ukrainian diplomatic services have made a significant contribution to this activity within the framework of the UN and its specialized agencies and have received much broader opportunities for realizing the national interests and needs of their peoples within the framework of radically renewed relations between the Union Center and the republics. The article is one of the first attempts in post-Soviet historiography to investigate the activities of the USSR, the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR in the UN and its specialized institutions during the period of perestroika

scholarly journals Russia’s Foreign Policy Evolution in the New Balkan Landscape

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 179-199
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Entina ◽  
Alexander Pivovarenko
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Southeast Europe ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Difference

The article reflects on the issue of the foreign policy strategy of modern Russia in the Balkans region. One of the most significant aspects of this problem is the difference in views between Russia and the West. Authors show how different interpretations of the events in former Yugoslavia in the 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s predetermined the sense of mutual suspicion and mistrust which spread to other regions such as the post-Soviet space. Exploring differences between the Russian and the Western (Euro-Atlantic) views on the current matters, authors draw attention to fundamental differences in terminology: while the Western narrative promotes more narrow geographical and political definitions (such as the Western Balkan Six), traditional Russian experts are more inclined to wider or integral definitions such as “the Balkans” and “Central and Southeast Europe”. Meanwhile none of these terms are applicable for analysis of the current trends such as the growing transit role of the Balkans region and its embedding in the European regional security architecture. Therefore, a new definition is needed to overcome the differences in vision and better understand significant recent developments in the region. Conceptualizing major foreign policy events in Central and Southeast Europe during the last three decades (the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s), authors demonstrate the significance of differences in tools and methods between the Soviet Union and the modern Russia. Permanent need for adaptation to changing political and security context led to inconsistence in Russian Balkan policy in the 1990s. Nevertheless, Russia was able to preserve an integral vision of the region and even to elaborate new transregional constructive projects, which in right political circumstances may promote stability and become beneficial for both Russia and the Euro-Atlantic community.

Soviet Foreign Policy Factionalism Under Stalin?: A Case Study of the Inevitability of War Controversy

1976 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-107
Author(s):  
Paul Marantz
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Harsh Discipline ◽  
Capitalist System ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Soviet Foreign Policy ◽  
Important Evidence

AbstractThere has been a great deal of controversy among Western scholars concerning the direction of Soviet foreign policy in the final years and months of Stalin's rule.1 One of the crucial questions at issue is whether or not there were significant divisions of opinion within the Politburo over foreign policy matters. This article attempts to explore this particular question through an examination of a doctrinal controversy that surfaced during Stalin's last years. In one of his most famous works, Imperialism: The Highest State of Capitalism, Lenin argued that war was an inevitable concomitant of the capitalist system. He contended that the unending struggle for markets meant that periodic wars among the capitalist powers were unavoidable and inevitable.2 Stalin adhered to this view throughout his long reign, and it was not until three years after Stalin's death, in Khruschchev's speech to the Twentieth Party Congress, that it was finally revised. Yet despite Stalin's strict adherence to the Leninist analysis of imperialism, and despite the harsh discipline that characterized his rule, there is evidence that the official interpretation was being publicly questioned even while Stalin was still alive. Given the nature of esoteric communication in the Soviet Union,and the close connection between doctrinal and policy debates, an examination of the controversy concerning the inevitability of war can provide important evidence having a direct bearing upon our understanding of this period.3

scholarly journals Do History Lessons Ever Pay off? A Diplomat’s Memoir

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodric Braithwaite
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
University Of Cambridge ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Underlying Causes ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Russian Language ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Moscow River

Sir Rodric Braithwaite was educated at Christ’s College, University of Cambridge, from where he went to serve in HM Diplomatic Service, having worked in Jakarta, Moscow, Washington, Warsaw, Rome, and Brussels, where he was a member of the British delegation to the European Community. From 1988 to 1992, Sir Rodric served as HM Ambassador in the Soviet Union during the decisive years of the Perestroika and the first British ambassador in Russia. Subsequently, he was appointed foreign policy adviser to the Prime Minister in the second John Major ministry and chaired the UK Joint Intelligence Committee between 1992 and 1993. He was appointed Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St Michael and St George (GCMG) in 1994. As a career diplomat, Sir Rodric gained decades of insight into the troubled relations between Russia and West, having taken part in numerous negotiations on arms control. His affinity with the decision-making circles in both Russia and Britain alongside with the mastery of the Russian language allow him to skillfully dissect the underlying causes of ups-and-downs in Moscow’s relationship with the West, employing the works of both English- and Russian-speaking analysts. Among his recent books are Across the Moscow River (2002), Moscow 1941: A City and Its People at War (2006), Afgantsy: The Russians in Afghanistan, 1979–1989 (2012), Armageddon and Paranoia: The Nuclear Confrontation (2017). In this essay, Sir Rodric reminisces of the years spent as a diplomat and provides his view on the usefulness and applicability of historical lessons while devising a foreign policy course.

scholarly journals Manifestation of the Internal Systemic Conflict in Mongolia

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
K. Demberel ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Investment Boom ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Second Period

The article deals with the issue of Mongolia's foreign policy during the Cold War. This period is divided into two parts. The first period, 1945-1960s, is a period of conflict between two systems: socialism and capitalism. In this first period of the Cold War Mongolia managed to establish diplomatic relations with socialist countries of Eastern Europe, as the “system allowed”. The second period, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s, is the period of the conflict of the socialist system, the period of the Soviet-Chinese confrontation. During this period Mongolia's foreign policy changed dramatically and focused on the Soviet Union. This was due to the Soviet investment «boom» that began in 1960s and the entry of Soviet troops on the territory of Mongolia in 1967. The Soviet military intervention into Mongolia was one of the main reasons for cooling the Soviet-Chinese relations. And military withdrawal contributed to the improvement of Soviet-Chinese relations until the mid-1980s and one of the conditions for improving relations with their neighbors. The internal systemic conflict had a serious impact on Mongolia's foreign policy over those years.

scholarly journals Strengthening the historical ties between Serbia and Cyprus in view of 21st century challenges and opportunities in Europe: The elevated geostrategic position in the Balkans and Eastern Mediterranean, the common legacy of neutrality and future engagement

Napredak ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-18
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Teofilaktu
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
Eu Enlargement ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
British Colonialism ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
National Interests ◽  
European Continent ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities

The foundations of the strong historical ties between Serbia and Cyprus lie on common struggles, dating back to the 19th and 20th centuries, particularly during the two great wars. Their long struggles against various aggressors, like the Ottoman Turks, Nazi Germany and British colonialism, have left long-lasting wounds on their societies, but also a legacy of bravery, resilience, perseverance and national pride. The deep friendship is also premised on common cultural and Orthodox roots, which helped the two peoples overcome major challenges and preserve their national identity and cultural values. This analysis explores the challenges ahead and assesses the new strategic partnership, including the trilateral cooperation between Serbia-Greece-Cyprus, particularly in light of EU enlargement in the Western Balkans and the volatile situation in the Eastern Mediterranean. The article also attempts to evaluate how the policy of neutrality, that both Yugoslavia and Cyprus have pursued as founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement, would serve today the national interests of Serbia and Cyprus and, by extension, stability and security in their respective regions and the European continent at large, given their elevated geostrategic position.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document