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

Christian Rakovsky wrote the above in 1926 while serving as the Soviet ambassador to France. It is the most pertinent paragraph of a long article written in order to explain more fully the foreign policy position of the Soviet government.

Extracts from this document...


"What seems to us advisable, and what we have done, is to conclude with every possible nation accords carrying the obligations, first, to maintain neutrality in case one or the other party is attacked, and second not to enter into political or financial or other combinations directed against either party. The advantages of these accords consists in their purely defensive nature and in the fact that nothing prevents their being concluded with all states without exception. The same obligations we have accepted towards Turkey and Germany we can accept toward all the other powers.1 Christian Rakovsky wrote the above in 1926 while serving as the Soviet ambassador to France. It is the most pertinent paragraph of a long article written in order to explain more fully the foreign policy position of the Soviet government. A good deal of the article is given up to a history-lesson from the Soviet perspective, but overall Soviet policy is clear, an acceptance of and maintenance of the international status quo that they had been pursuing since 1920.2 This was to be achieved by a bilateral approach with individual nations, in which the Soviets would always seek to improve their international position by exploiting the weaknesses and differences between other powers. The Rapallo treaty with Germany [1922] is an example of this. As the twenties became the thirties the threat from the newly invigorated Germany increased. Recognising that Nazi Germany was now the major threat Soviet efforts became more active as they pursued a strategy of collective security. ...read more.


The German charge d'affaires in Moscow reported to Berlin on May 3rd 1939: "...Molotov, who is not a Jew, has the reputation of being the 'most intimate friend and collaborator' of Stalin. His appointment is obviously intended to provide a guarantee that foreign policy will be conducted strictly on lines laid down by Stalin."11 William Shirer, whose credentials as a journalist outweigh his abilities as a historian, nevertheless makes a strong point as to just what Litvinov's dismissal might mean for Soviet foreign relations. "The significance of Litvinov's abrupt dismissal was obvious to all. It meant a sharp violent turning in Soviet foreign policy. Litvinov had been the archapostle of collective security, of strengthening the power of the League of Nations, of seeking Russian security against Nazi Germany by a military alliance with Great Britain and France."12 His argument has a basis in fact as the future speeches and actions of Molotov bear out. The newly appointed foreign minister lambastes the British and French in a speech to the Supreme Soviet on 31st May 1939. He reminded them that the British and French [went]..."further in making concessions at the expense of Czechoslovakia than they had any right to go." He called Munich a 'disaster' pointing out that far from averting a European war, the events at Munich instead led to further German aggression. [German occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia] Germany he argues, was able to do this "so smoothly, that the question arises, what was in fact the real purpose of the Munich negotiations?"13 This may have been 'posturing' by the Soviets but it came from the highest level. ...read more.


This is paradoxical certainly because although eastern Poland can be viewed as a 'buffer zone' between Germany and the Soviet Union proper before Soviet occupation, afterwards it meant that the two powers faced each other directly on a much longer front. Stalin could be pleased too at the prospect of a possible political backlash by Italy and Japan. In Japan this happened very soon, the Government resigned feeling betrayed and dishonoured by Germany.23 In July Zhukhov defeated the Japanese at Khalkin-Gol and in August the whole Kwangtung army. The Nazi-Soviet pact and this double defeat of the Japanese removed very quickly over the summer the main security conundrum that had been confronting the USSR for years. "Taken together with the Nazi-Soviet Pact, this removed the danger of war from both Russia's exposed fronts, in the east as well as in the west."24 In conclusion this essay can only say that the Nazi-Soviet Pact was rather a 'stunning success' (as it would have appeared to Stalin in 1939) than a failure. For years the USSR struggled to obtain recognition and maintain the status quo. After the failure of the Soviet collective security policy at Munich, barely one year later the USSR can boast that threats from Germany in the west and Japan in the east (at least in the short term) are over. Germany, Britain, and France are at war with each other. The USSR has gained significant territory and also extended her sphere of influence greatly over Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Bessarabia. She also regained those parts of the Ukraine and Byelorussia lost to Poland in the 1920-21 war. ...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 International History, 1945-1991 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 International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Khrushchev's attempts at modernisation.

    and it was hoped that this would stimulate recovery and so lead to an improvement in the living and working conditions of the Soviet people. Gorbachev also needed to reinvigorate the Soviet economy if it was to have any chance of competing with Ronald Reagan's United States of America.

  2. Why did Stalin Emerge as Leader of Russia by 1929?

    This was a crucial underestimation of his capacities, Stalin was not in fact dull at all, but extraordinarily ruthless and determined. The Politburo was the central committee on which members of the Bolshevik party held positions. Stalin became the Party secretary, meaning he would receive information on all the activities

  1. What were the causes of the disintegration of the Soviet Union as a socialist ...

    However, I personally am not persuaded by this line of argument, primarily due to its basis in the Marxist view of history. While I would not go so far as to suggest that the Russian Empire in 1917 was a society based upon feudalism, there is no way it could be described as being in the advanced stages of capitalism.

  2. This graduation paper is about U.S. - Soviet relations in Cold War period. Our ...

    The price was astronomical-and perhaps- avoidable. Chapter 2: The Cold War Chronology. 2.1 The War Years. Whatever tensions existed before the war, conflicts over military and diplomatic issues during the war proved sufficiently grave to cause additional mistrust. Two countries that in the past had shared almost no common ground

  1. American History.

    *Cultural Trends: Public Rituals* - Instead of reading about the Enlightenment, though, most people simply communicated orally, as many were poorly educated or illiterate. Therefore, the common cultures of North America were mainly oral, communal and very local, since information traveled slowly and usually stayed w/in confined regions.

  2. Communist Purification in Czechoslovakia.

    Dubcek also declared that he desires to put an end to censorship so that more opinion could be shared and expressed among the people without fear or oppression. He also wished to improve the human rights condition in Czechoslovakia. During the Stalinist era people were arrested and being accused as


    Whoever controlled the Party thus had great power and influence. * In 1921 there had been a Ban on Factions within the Party to try to minimise dissent. Some leading Bolsheviks, like Trotsky, wanted more openness in the party and more debate on issues and policies.

  2. Why did the USSR agree to the Nazi-Soviet pact?

    - The People's Commissariat for the Interior - demanded that all so accused of "terrorism" should be executed without delay, and without right of appeal against their sentence. Almost instantaneously, mass executions - without trial or as a result of "confessions" elicited under torture - became the order of the day.

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