Rate this paper
  • Currently rating
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.00 / 4
Paper Topic:

US History

Evaluate the trade-offs at the Yalta conference in 1945 . Was it a "sellout " t the Soviet Union ? Why or why not You need to be specific and use pertinent examples

The Crimea Conference of the heads of the Governments of the United States of America the United Kingdom , and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics , which took place from Feb . 4 to 11 , was to my way of thinking a conference of fully equal partners in the cooperation and collaboration to winning in the struggle against fascism and establishing a new world where the freedoms

would intact and all nations would be treated equally

As far as the general principles are concerned , it was a completely faithrful and taken-for granted-matter The main principles were as follows (a ) to establish conditions of internal peace (b ) to carry out emergency relief measures for the relief of distressed peoples (c ) to form interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population and pledged to the earliest possible establishment through free elections of Governments responsive to the will of the people and (d ) to facilitate where necessary the holding of such elections

A bit more complicated and perplexed was certainly the matter concerning reparations and the outcome of the negotiations was as such "The Moscow reparation commission should take in its initial studies as a basis for discussion the suggestion of the Soviet Government that the should be 22 billion dollars and that 50 per cent should go to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics That is : the Soviet Union got 50 per cent of aggregate reparations . Was it too much of a tradeoff that the USA and Britain enabled In my opinion it was a fully faithful desicion for the USSR had to carry the main burden during the was starting from the 22th of June when the ar against the USSR got underway .Human and economic losses were the most crucial for the socialistic country thus , the desicion about contribution shares should be approved of . The British were against making the conclusion of the Moscow reparation commision ultimate to this extent it would probably be better to discuss the dilemma in four : incding the USA , Great Britain and France

Another problem to ponder over is the one which dealt with the presence of Soviet forces in the war operations against Japan The Soviets announced they would take part in war against Japan in a matter of two-three months , under the condition if the status of the Mongol Republic would remain the same . Here the Soviets certainly tried to escape yet another war which ccould still more deteriorate their economy and overall situation but actually , they did not possess much of the force any more , and this was mainly concentrated in the Central Europe fighting to get to the German b

On the other hand , it was the Polish Republic according to which the Soviets had to compromise . Half of the bs were not yet defined till the peace conference . As for the government of Poland , which used to be purely communistic , it was said to be reorganised on the more democratic basis

Thus , taking everything into account , I 'd like to express the opinion that Yalta Peace Confrence of 1945 was in its most part a positive event in the run of which just decisions were adopted . It goes without saying all countries decided to grab the bigger and better share of the pie but eventually everyone had to consider other side and the tradeoffs made to the favor of the USSR were in the end deserved and justified

Bibliography J .Smith "Peace conferences of the Second World War , Dublin , 1978 M . Merx "War and Peace : Along the Way , Rostock , 1998 K . Murdock "W .Churchill : the Milestones , Sioux-Falls , 1995 p...

Not the Essay You're looking for? Get a custom essay (only for $12.99)