• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A study of why the USSR signed a non aggression pact with Germany rather than with the Western Powers?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

A study of why the USSR signed a non aggression pact with Germany rather than with the Western Powers? Ana Gosnar Mr. Rowe May 30, 2004 Word Count: 1798 CONTENTS: A. Plan of investigation Page 3 B. Summary of Evidence Page 3-4 C. Evaluation of Sources Page 5 D. Analysis Page 5-6 E. Conclusion Page 7 F. List of Sources Page 8 A study of why the USSR signed a non-aggression pact with Germany rather than with the Western Powers? A Plan of the investigation This investigation will try to establish why Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler rather than with the Western powers. In the main body of this historical investigation it will be discussed why Stalin signed the pact with Hitler, with Germany's and USSR's specific aims stated, and why and where they originated. Also discussed will be the events occurring prior to the signing of the non-aggression pact, with specific emphasis on the League of Nations, the Treaty of Versailles and The Munich conference. The previous foreign relations between the USSR and Germany and the USSR and other European countries will also be conveyed. B Summary of evidence Soviet foreign policy wanted to build a system of alliances which would end the USSR's isolation from the world. Stalin feared that Germany would be pulled in an alliance against Soviet Russia with the Western Powers.1 His fear increased when Germany joined ...read more.

Middle

The book mostly concentrates on what the pact led to in relation to the Baltic States. The reason this book was valuable was because it shows how other countries saw the pact between Russia and Germany. Its limitations might include that it is written by a Latvian author, so some events are written from a Latvian point of view. Grey Ian (1982). Stalin -Man of Steel. Great Britain: Cox & Wyman Ltd. This book is written by a British author Ian Grey, I understand that this is one the best bibliography's about Stalin written by a non communist. This book's main advantage was that it had a section between the wars, where it described Stalin's and the USSR's views on Russia and how it affected the world. Even though the book was concentrating on Stalin, most of the important events and names were mentioned. Some limitations that are noticeable are that the author is biased, in some cases, and also that the book doesn't give all the detail of some of the important events that happened. D Analysis The USSR and Germany were the most unlikely countries to enter into a pact of any sort that one can imagine at the time. During the 1930's Hitler had made no secrets of his racial contempt for the Slavs, his political contempt of Bolshevism and his ideas of territorial expansion into the USSR to create 'Lebensraum' for the master race of Aryans. ...read more.

Conclusion

Stalin's fear was an additional reason why he signed the pact; he thought that the Western Powers with Germany were forming a block against him and if he had a treaty with Germany their plans wouldn't succeed. A further reason to keep in mind is that the Western Powers were not fully dedicated to accomplishing a reasonable treaty with the Soviets in 1939. This could be due to the fact that the Western Powers were in total opposition to communist Russia. The Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact also provided Stalin with the advantages territorial gains and trade agreements. F Sources: Boyce R. & Roberson E. (1989). Paths to War. London: Macmillan Education ltd. Farmer Alan (2000). Modern European History 1890-1990. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Grey Ian (1982). Stalin -Man of Steel. Great Britain: Cox & Wyman Ltd. Kissinger, Henry. (1994). Diplomacy. New York: Simon& Schuster. Read A. & Fisher D. (1988). The Deadly Embrace. New York: W.W Norton & Company Reyner E.G. (1999). The Great Dictatorships: international relations 1918-39. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Vizulis Izidors (1988). The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939. New York: Praeger Publishers. 1 Grey Ian (1982). Stalin -Man of Steel. (Great Britain: Cox & Wyman Ltd.) 295. 2 IBID 296. 3 Vizulis Izidors (1988). The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939. (New York: Praeger Publishers.) 19. 4 IBID 22 5 Grey 309 6 Read A. & Fisher D. (1988). (The Deadly Embrace. New York: W.W Norton & Company) 2 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Why did Stalin sign the Nazi-Soviet Pact?

    He would have to pay the soviet price for a while and conquer up to the agreed boundaries in the east; a quick invasion, allowing himself much of the same of what Stalin looked for in the eastern lands (which I will explain later)

  2. Evaluate historical comparisons of Hitler and Stalin and their regimes

    that their similarities are fundamental and is what makes them both totalitarian dictators. Comparing Hitler and Stalin has always proving to be difficult task for historians as they were born 10 years apart in different countries and from different backgrounds.

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    So Stalin turned to England and France. He was very annoyed though that they gave in to Hitler without a fight as long as he didn't take over any more countries. Stalin secretly was in negotiations with Germany whilst also speaking with England and France as well.

  2. To what extent was equality achieved under Stalin?

    The local police, secret police (the OGPU), and the military backed them up, creating a quarter of a million agents, who collectivised 25 million peasant households22. They killed thousands of others who resisted and also sent several million to forced labour camps along with the political opponents.23 The way in

  1. Hitlers Germany

    Again and again one is struck by the way in which, having once decided rationally on a course of action, Hitler would whip himself into a passion which enabled him to bear down all opposition, and provided him with the motive power to enforce his will on others.

  2. "The first world war was the result of long-standing rivalries between the great powers". ...

    This essentially renders any contribution to war from this rivalry down to a short term objective root, in line with my argument. It is debatable as to whether the naval race was a long-standing rivalry or a short term event.

  1. Versailles Treaty- evaluation of sources

    Interpretation A is limited in the sense that it doesn't pinpoint whether the peacemakers are to be criticised. Nonetheless, the passage acknowledges that the punitive terms set by the peacemakers' rarely ensured peace but instilled an irrevocable bitterness in the Germans and this "desire to reverse the judgement of Versailles" meant that conflict was forthcoming.

  2. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    Very few private businesses existed in the 1930s and those that did were deprived of resources and state run businesses got their orders from the centre. Businesses had to carry out ‘the plan’ ï set out details of wage rates, prices, output etc. Gosplan coordinated the plan at the centre.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work