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

Why did Stalin opt for the pact with Hitler in 1939?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why did Stalin opt for the pact with Hitler in 1939? Darshan Sanghrajka Matriculation number: 010000962 21st March 2003 Words: 1,900 In August 1939, the Soviet Union and Germany signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Why would Stalin opt for a Pact with Hitler, whilst knowing that Hitler had aims to invade the USSR? Soviet historians have argued that Russia simply did not have the military capabilities to defend herself against a German attack and this pact would provide Russia with time to prepare for the inevitable. However, since the opening of the archives in 1989, it is clear that Stalin had other motives, mainly expansionist aims. Although this alliance between the anti-Nazi Soviet Union and the anti-Communist Germany seemed unlikely, there was a long history of cooperation between Germany and the Soviet Union. This essay will aim to show that Stalin did not just opt for the Pact because it bought him time to prepare for an inevitable war but mainly because it provided him with the territory that he wanted and the basis to create a World War, which would destroy capitalism. All three provide us with a more realistic reason as to why Stalin would abandon communist ideology. The Nazi-Soviet Pact included a non-aggression pact and an economic agreement, which committed the Soviet Union to provide food products and raw materials to Germany in return for finished goods such as machinery from Germany. Secret protocols divided Eastern Europe into two spheres of interest, one for the Soviet Union and one for Germany. ...read more.

Middle

Pact was signed and he argued that the Pact was inevitable, given the circumstances and the rewards available to the Soviet Union. "It was like a gambit in chess; if we hadn't made that move, the war would have started earlier, much to our disadvantage. It was very hard for us - as Communists, as anti-fascists - to accept the idea of joining forces with Germany."3 Soviet historians argue that "subsequent events revealed that this step was the only correct one under the circumstances. By taking it, the USSR was able to continue peaceful construction for nearly two years and to strengthen its defences".4 This was no doubt a motive behind Stalin's decision but as mentioned, there was greater reasoning behind such a move. After 1989, when the Soviet archives were opened up during Gorbarchev's period of Glasnost, historians have been able to delve deeper into answering this question. With respect to these other motives, Viktor Suvorov, a former Soviet army officer, challenges the Soviet historians and argues that the Nazi-Soviet pact was actually part of Stalin's Marxist strategy for revolutionary victory in Europe. Marx had argued that conflicts between Capitalist nations would create an opportunity to transform the war into a class war and establish socialism. Of course, he still advocated Socialism in one country but he also believed that revolution would occur eventually. In December 1927, Stalin announced that capitalism had become unstable and argued that the "world economic crisis will turn into a political crisis in a number of countries"5 Therefore, the idea was to wait for this to occur, whilst also industrialising and rearming the country. ...read more.

Conclusion

Therefore, it is a more realistic portrayal of Stalin and disproves Soviet historians who have argued that the Pact was solely, a temporary and necessary measure to delay the Germans until Russia was militarily strong. Two aspects of the Pact support the argument that Stalin had expansionist aims in Eastern Europe; first, the dealings with the Baltic states and secondly, Lithuania. The Soviets had been insistent about gaining the Baltic states in the early negotiations with Britain and France, however only Germany could offer them to the USSR. The negotiations with Lithuania show that Stalin actively aimed to broaden Soviet borders. On 10th January 1941, Germany and the Soviet Union signed another protocol, in which USSR would pay Germany, $7,500,000 for Lithuania. The secret protocols had all been demanded by the Soviets rather than being offered by Hitler. This theory is also supported by events after the Pact; The Soviets wanted Finland to sign a similar pact to the ones signed by the Baltic states. However, Finland refused and the Red Army invaded it on 29th November. The motive behind the Pact was to regain pre-World War 1 territory rather than simply buying time. In conclusion, Stalin's act of realpolitik allowed him time to remodel his arm from an defensive archaic one to a offensive force. "Of course, it's all a game to see who can fool whom. I know what Hitler's up to. He thinks he's outsmarted me, but actually it's I who have tricked him." This is Stalin's explanation for opting for the Pact, to Lavrenti Beria, his Commissioner for Internal Affairs. ...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. Hitlers Germany

    Others are solid mixtures of concrete and glass or cinderblock-functional, durable, and unimaginative. The cities are hybrid. The Hochh�user-the semi-skyscrapers-are likely to stand in no sensible relationship to the architecture around them. Where there were so many wide fields of blasted stone, new buildings sprouted one at a time, or

  2. Why did Stalin Agree to the Nazi-Soviet Pact?

    Therefore, Litvinov proposed a treaty stating each country promised to protect each other and Eastern Europe. The problem was that Britain took six weeks to reply, and Stalin was not impressed and figured the west were not serious about an ally.

  1. How realistic are POW films?

    the time and effort put into the escape plan, instead of escaping they decide to continue with the football match. In real life circumstances would not have happened as escaping would have been more of a priority than winning football math.

  2. How far did Stalin manage to modernize Russia by 1938?

    seized by the state, while in1932 69.6 were produced, and 22.6 - more than double - was exported. What we conclude, is that the state was letting the peasants starve, to complete the industrialization process they had in mind. As Roy Medvedev estimated, about 10 million people were victimized during collectivization, with 3 million losing their lives.

  1. Apeasement Did the policy of appeasement go to any great lengths toward stopping the ...

    was dominant within British society and Chamberlains policy was to appease Hitler�(tm)s actions stating that "Germany has the right to station their troops anywhere within its own country." Continuing with this view lord Lothian sated they are "only going into there own back garden."

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

    What Arendt was able to do masterfully was make these controversial ideas without the hindsight historians have today on this topic. Also it was never her original intent to make a comparative work on Hitler and Stalin, the books main objective was more on the National Socialist Party and how it formed a totalitarian state.

  1. The Somme Offensive Failure - analysis of the sources.

    Throughout the entire course of the Battle of the Somme, the British artillery fired over 27,000,000 rounds. Source 1.4 proves useful by giving an accurate depiction of the sheer amounts of artillery used. It also aids the facts that unfortunate political circumstances led to the eventual failure to deliver functional ammunition.

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

    The regime had increased the number of schools and made the content of education more political. 4. Organisations like the Komsomol were growing in importance ï many young people became keen Communists. Therefore, Stalin’s successful propaganda could be said to have not been down to anything in particular that

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