Further issues that were brought up in Tehran were that Russia would join the war on Japan when Germany had fallen. It seemed that an agreement had been reached that to create a “common front” but the specific negotiations were to be left until Yalta. Germany was also discussed and it was put forward that it would be split into 5 parts which were self governed with 2 internationally controlled areas. Although Churchill suggested further separation Stalin and Roosevelt seemed happy and allied with the proposed arrangement. However once again the final decision was delayed until Yalta. Although Tehran had achieved the definite launching of the second front in Europe many of the other issues were left undecided until Yalta a year and a half later. This may have been a major reason why there was Cold War tension by 1945 because important issues that could have been dealt with were not and came back at later conferences to sting the allies’ plans for post war unity.
The Yalta summit took place between the 4th and 11th of February 1945. Once again the Big Three were present. Each leader came to the conference with a set of objectives. Roosevelt’s were to set in stone the Russians commitment to the war in Japan and to establish the United Nations. Churchill was more interested in the future of Poland. Stalin also had a large interest in the future of Poland as well as the punishment of Germany (the reparations especially). Roosevelt, who was suffering from poor health during the conference, first wanted to deal with the problem of Japan. As Japan was still strong militarily the USA saw Russian help as the only way to defeat Japan (the atomic bomb had not yet been tested nor had the Japanese territories of Okinawa and Iwo Jima). The traditionalists believe that the USA were seeking Russian help in order to save “hundreds of thousands of American lives” that military analysts had predicted. Also so the war could be ended as quickly as possible in order to bring American troops home. The issue of Russia joining the war had been discussed at Tehran but was left open ended. At Yalta an agreement was settled that the Russians would join the war after the conclusion of the European war that was being helped by American lend- lease and goodwill aid to the Russians.
Roosevelt’s second priority was to establish as United Nations organisation. Roosevelt felt that a UN would stop the USA become isolationist again. The idea was accepted but on conditions that some British colonies and Russian republics gained membership as well. The UN was not accepted straight away by the Churchill and Stalin and after much explanation from Edward R. Stettinius, the US Secretary of State, they agreed. Roosevelt had come to the conference with two main aims and had achieved them both even in his poor health. These were the successes of the Yalta conference, however there were many other issues that had to be discussed.
The issue of what must happen to Germany was strong fro Stalin especially. He wanted a total of $20 billion in reparations from Germany, which half should go to Russia. However the British and the USA were not forthcoming because they believed that Germany was a useful trading partner and did not want to damage her economy even more. The revisionists say this was just the Westerners trying to limit the amount Russia received because they wanted to see her struggle and the USA especially didn’t want a rival to her booming economy which might have arisen if Russia had received the full amount of reparations she had asked for. However the final reparations figure was not decided but instead was to be put in front of the reparations commission in Moscow. After the discussions the USA were inclined to give the Russians what they wanted in terms of reparations because it would be a useful bargaining tool for Washington in future discussions. The discussions of Germany were not just about reparations however but also about the break up of the land. Stalin recalled at the first Political Plenary Session on the 5th February what had been agreed but not finalised at Tehran and stated that he believed this was the right step for the post war Germany. However the idea that each country take a portion of Germany arose and was agreed upon. Now the question of whether France was to hold a seat on the Allied Control Commission (ACC) that was to take charge of Germany the day of the surrender had been raised. Also whether France should control a piece of Germany was a point of discussion. It was decided that France could have a seat of the ACC and a portion of Germany which was to be taken out of the USA’ and Britain’s sectors with the Russians keeping their section the same. The view of the traditionalists is that Russia wanted to keep their sector the same because they were afraid of too much capitalist influence in the Eastern section of Germany which could then influence other Eastern European countries in Russia ‘sphere of influence’ to become capitalist. They refused to relinquish their sector so the Western allies had to separate theirs. A main reason why France was given a sector even though it had been, in some minds, relatively pro- NAZI during the Vichy government period was to bring extra support to the area. All agreed that Germany would have to be occupied for many years but the USA wished to pull out their troops as soon as possible to avoid public anger back home. With the French presence the USA withdrawal what not be so serious as French troops would be present. Britain especially wanted to give France the sector because she wanted France to prosper (France and Britain are important trading partners) and also Churchill hoped that France might perhaps upset the balance in Central Europe in favour of the West. The revisionist view is that France was brought in to unsettle Russia and try to turn Eastern European countries in Russia’s sphere of influence to capitalist countries.
A further factor that was discussed at Yalta was the Polish issue. Although Roosevelt did not believe this involved the USA to a great extent he was proved wrong, as it was a major talking point of the conference. The borders of Poland had been decided at Tehran but the issue of the government in Poland as a sticking point. The Declaration of a Liberated Europe, which was finalised at the summit, stated that countries should be able to hold free elections. Stalin agreed to this but refused to allow supervisors from Britain and the USA access to monitor the elections. This meant the Red Army who were in Poland could pressurise the population in to voting for the communists who would be pro- Moscow (even a puppet government). Once again however the issue of Poland was not settled and was passed on to a later date. The traditionalist view was that Stalin refused to allow supervision of the election because he had no plans to let Poland become anything but Communist, he was told but the puppet leader, Beirut, that if free elections were held a capitalist government would have a landslide victory. The revisionist view was that Russia would allow the elections take place in a free environment and as the countries were so close to the Soviet state they would become pro-Moscow for their own security reasons not because the Red Army had forced them.
The final wartime conference was at Potsdam. The line up of leaders had dramatically changed in the few months between Yalta and Potsdam. Roosevelt had died and was replaced by the Vice- President Truman and Churchill had lost a general election to Labour who were headed by Clemence Atlee. Between the conferences there had been much controversy due to actions taken by governments such as Russia inserting a communist dominated government in February and the Russians shock at being excluded from discussions concerning the surrender of NAZI troops in northern Italy as well as the ceasing of the Lend- Lease agreement on May 11th. The actions would have worried all the governments in the lead up to Potsdam because of the “honeymoon” situation that had been reached at Yalta. However Stalin may have felt slightly hard done by due to the Percentages agreement, which was made with Churchill. It promised Russia 90% dominance in Romania for example while the Western allies gained 90% dominance in Greece. This agreement would have given Stalin the impression that he had every right to place a government in Romania and the West should have no means for concern. When they did however he may have wondered if the West were actually going to stick to anything they promised. This revisionist view shows that the West were promising one thing to the Russians then going back on their word. The post revisionist view states that the west merely made a rough agreement and the Russians misunderstood the finality of this agreement when they placed a government in Romania.
At the conference itself inroads were made which could not be made at previous conferences. The Polish borders were settled at the ‘Oder- Neisse’ line. Reparations decisions from Germany were reached with Russia being allowed to take 10% from Western Zones plus 15% in return for foodstuffs and raw materials. Russia could also extract whatever it liked from its own zone. However other factors were once again left unresolved such as the lasting peace treaty and the Dardanelles issue. The treaty was not helped by the new approaches the USA and Britain were taking. They were becoming far more hard line towards the Russians. The reason for this was because the USA had developed the Atomic Bomb so were using Atomic diplomacy. This bargaining tool meant America had power to bargain for more than they might have expected because the bomb was such a huge threat. However rather than Stalin submitting to Truman’s every request he became more stubborn because he knew that the Atomic bomb was a paper tiger against the USSR. The revisionist view of the conference is that Truman tried to scare Stalin into submission but Stalin held strong because he was not convinced by the power of the bomb against the Russians.
The wartime conferences were spectacularly inconclusive. Too many key factors were left unsolved for too long. If issues such as Poland were sorted out when they were first discussed at Tehran then the later conferences would have been a lot smoother due to the lighter workload. Although they all had their slight successes they predominantly failed because of the lack of action taken towards any issue that was remotely controversial. The period was very deceitful and each side were trying to catch each other out even though they were meant to be allies and were fighting the same cause. The problem was their opposite ideologies. They made it impossible for the two sides to see directly eye to eye hence the lack of conviction when it came to making decisions. If decisions had been made then relations could have run more smoothly after the war because no issues would have been so ambiguous. If the conferences went well then things like the dropping of the Atomic Bomb on Japan in spite of Russia’s imminent arrival in the war probably would not have happened and needless confrontations that lead to the cold war could have been avoided. Traditionalists would say that the Russians were being expansionary and all they wanted was to spread the tide of Communism. Revisionists would say the USA and Britain were to eager to offer the Russians one things then go back on their word, also that the Western allies did not understand Russian siege mentality and their need for security by using Poland as a buffer state. Post revisionists would say that the conferences resulted in cold war tension because of the different ideologies, which refused to allow the two sides to meet eye to eye so confusion, stubbornness and deceit occurred rather than harmony. Cold war tension arose by the end of 1945 because of the failure to finalise important issues quickly enough, which lead to mistrust, which ended up as the Cold War.
