In October 1964, the leadership changed in the USSR. The unity of the socialist camp was broken, relations between East and West were very strained due to the Caribbean crisis. In addition, the German problem remained unresolved, which was very worrying for the leadership of the USSR. Under these conditions, the newest history of the Soviet state began. The decisions adopted at the XXIII Congress of the CPSU in 1966, confirmed the benchmark for a tougher foreign policy. From this moment on, peaceful coexistence was subordinated to a qualitatively different tendency to strengthen the socialist regime and strengthen solidarity between the national liberation movement and the proletariat.
The complexity of the situation
The restoration of absolute control in the socialist camp was complicated by tensions with China and Cuba. Problems brought events in Czechoslovakia. In June 1967, a writers congress openly opposed the party leadership. After that, mass student strikes and demonstrations began. As a result of increased opposition, Novotny had to cede the leadership of the party to Dubcek in 1968. The new board decided to conduct a series of reforms. In particular, freedom of speech was established, the HRC agreed to hold alternative elections for leaders. However, the situation was resolved by the introduction of troops from 5 states parties to the Warsaw Pact. Immediately failed to suppress the unrest. This forced the Soviet leadership to remove Dubcek and his entourage, placing Gusak at the head of the party. On the example of Czechoslovakia, the so-called Brezhnev doctrine of the principle of "limited sovereignty" was implemented. The suppression of reforms halted the country's modernization by at least 20 years. In 1970, the situation in Poland was complicated. The problems were related to price increases, which caused massive uprisings of workers in the Baltic ports. Over the next years, the situation did not get better; strikes continued. The leader of the unrest was the Solidarity union, led by L. Walesa. The leadership of the USSR did not dare to send troops, and the gene was entrusted with the "normalization" of the situation. Jaruzelsky. On December 13, 1981, he introduced martial law in Poland.
Discharge of tension
In the early 70's. relations between East and West have changed dramatically. Tension began to weaken. This was largely due to the achievement of military parity between the USSR and the USA, East and West. At the first stage, interested cooperation was established between the Soviet Union and France, and then with Germany. At the turn of the 60-70s. The Soviet leadership began to actively implement a new foreign policy. Its key provisions were recorded in the Peace Program, which was adopted at the XXIV Party Congress. The most important points should be attributed to the fact that neither the West nor the USSR refused the arms race within the framework of this policy. The whole process thus acquired a civilized framework. The recent history of relations between the West and the East began with a significant expansion of the areas of cooperation, mainly Soviet-American. In addition, relations between the USSR, Germany and France improved. The latter withdrew from NATO in 1966, which served as an impetus for the active development of cooperation.
German problem
For its resolution, the USSR expected to receive intermediary assistance from France. However, it was not required, since the Social Democrat W. Brandt became chancellor. The essence of his policy was that the unification of German territory no longer appeared as a prerequisite for establishing relations between East and West. It was delayed for the future as a key goal of multilateral negotiations. Thanks to this, the Moscow Treaty was concluded on August 12, 1970. In accordance with it, the parties undertook to respect the integrity of all European countries within their actual borders. Germany, in particular, recognized the western borders of Poland. And the line with the GDR. An important stage was also the signing in the fall of 1971 of the quadripartite agreement on Zap. To Berlin. This agreement confirmed the groundlessness of the political and territorial claims on it by the FRG. This was the absolute victory of the USSR, since all the conditions on which the Soviet Union had insisted since 1945 were fulfilled.
America Position Assessment
Quite a favorable development of events allowed the leadership of the USSR to strengthen the belief that a cardinal shift in the balance of forces in favor of the Soviet Union occurred on the international scene. And the states of the socialist camp. The position of America and the imperialist bloc was assessed by Moscow as "weakened." Such confidence was built on several factors. The key factors were the continued strengthening of the national liberation movement, as well as the achievement of military-strategic parity with America in 1969 in terms of the number of nuclear weapons. In accordance with this, the buildup of types of weapons and their improvement, according to the logic of the leaders of the USSR, acted as an integral part of the struggle for peace.
OSV-1 and OSV-2
The need to achieve parity made the issue of bilateral arms limitation, especially ballistic intercontinental missiles, topical. Nixon’s visit to Moscow in the spring of 1972 was of great importance in this process. On May 26, an Interim Agreement was signed defining restrictive measures with regard to strategic weapons. This agreement was called OSV-1. He was imprisoned for 5 years. The agreement limited the number of US and USSR ballistic intercontinental missiles launched from submarines. Allowable levels for the Soviet Union were higher since America possessed weapons carrying warheads with separable elements. At the same time, the number of charges themselves was not specified in the agreement. This allowed, without violating the contract, to achieve a unilateral advantage in this area. OSV-1, therefore, did not stop the arms race. The formation of a system of agreements was continued in 1974. L. Brezhnev and J. Ford were able to agree on new conditions for limiting strategic arms. The signing of the OSV-2 agreement was supposed to be carried out in the 77th year. However, this did not happen, in connection with the creation of “cruise missiles” in the USA - new weapons. America categorically refused to consider the threshold levels for them. In 1979, the agreement was nevertheless signed by Brezhnev and Carter, but the US Congress did not ratify it until 1989.
Discharge Policy Results
Over the years of the implementation of the Peace Program, significant advances have been made in the cooperation of East and West. The total volume of trade increased by 5 times, and the Soviet-American - by 8. The interaction strategy was reduced to the signing of large agreements with Western companies for the purchase of technology or the construction of factories. So at the turn of the 60-70s. As part of an agreement with the Italian Fiat Corporation, a VAZ was created. But this event is more likely to be attributed to exceptions than to the rule. For the most part, international programs were limited to inappropriate business trips of delegations. Import of foreign technology was carried out according to an ill-conceived scheme. Really fruitful cooperation was negatively affected by administrative and bureaucratic obstacles. As a result, many contracts fell short of expectations.
Helsinki Process 1975
Detente in relations between East and West, however, has borne fruit. She allowed the convening of a Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The first consultations took place in 1972-1973. The country that adopted the CSCE was Finland. Helsinki (the capital of the state) has become the center of discussion of the international situation. Foreign ministers gathered for the first consultations. The first stage was held from July 3 to 7, 1973. The venue for the next round of negotiations was Geneva. The second stage took place from 09/18/1973 to 07/21/1975. He suggested several rounds lasting 3-6 months. They were negotiated by delegates and experts nominated by the participating countries. At the second stage, the development and subsequent coordination of agreements on the agenda items of the general meeting was under way. The venue for the third round was again Finland. Helsinki received top government and political leaders.
Negotiators
Helsinki agreements were discussed:
- Gene. Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Brezhnev.
- President of America J. Ford.
- Federal Chancellor of Germany Schmidt.
- French President W. Giscard d'Estaing.
- British Prime Minister Wilson.
- President of Czechoslovakia Gusak.
- First Secretary of the SED Central Committee Honneker.
- Chairman of the State Council Zhivkov.
- First Secretary of the CC
The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe was held with the participation of representatives of 35 states, including officials from Canada and the United States.
Accepted Documents
The participating countries have approved the Helsinki Declaration. In accordance with it, proclaimed:
- The inviolability of state borders.
- Mutual refusal to use force in conflict resolution.
- Non-interference in the internal politics of the participating states.
- Respect for human rights and other provisions.
In addition, the heads of delegation signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. It contained the agreements to be executed as a whole. The main areas recorded in the document were:
- Safety in Europe.
- Cooperation in the field of economics, technology, ecology, science.
- Interaction in the humanitarian and other fields.
- Further action after the CSCE.
Key principles
The final act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe included 10 provisions, in accordance with which the norms of interaction were determined:
- Sovereign equality.
- Non-use of force or threat of its use.
- Respect for sovereign rights.
- Territorial integrity.
- Inviolability of borders.
- Respect for freedoms and human rights.
- Non-interference in domestic politics.
- Equality of peoples and their right to independently decide their own destiny.
- Interaction between countries.
- Fulfillment of international legal obligations.
The Helsinki Final Act acted as a guarantee of the recognition and inviolability of the post-war borders. This was beneficial primarily to the USSR. In addition, the Helsinki process made it possible to formulate and impose obligations on all member countries to strictly observe freedoms and human rights.
Short term effects
What prospects did the Helsinki process open? The date of its holding is considered by historians to be the culmination of a relaxation of tension in the international arena. The USSR was most interested in the question of post-war borders. For the Soviet leadership, it was extremely important to achieve recognition of the inviolability of the post-war borders, the territorial integrity of countries, which meant international legal consolidation of the situation in Eastern Europe. All this happened as part of a compromise. The issue of human rights is a problem that interested Western countries that visited the Helsinki process. The year of the CSCE was the starting point for the development of the dissident movement in the USSR. The international legal consolidation of the obligation to observe human rights allowed us to launch a campaign to protect them in the Soviet Union, which was actively carried out by Western states at that time.
Interesting fact
It is worth saying that since 1973 there have been separate negotiations between representatives of the Warsaw Pact countries and NATO. The issue of arms reduction was discussed. But the alleged success was never achieved. This was due to the tough stance of the Warsaw Pact states, which surpassed NATO in conventional types of weapons and did not want to reduce them.
Strategic Military Balance
The Helsinki process ended in a compromise. After signing the final document, the USSR began to feel like a master and began to install SS-20 missiles in Czechoslovakia and the German Democratic Republic, which differed in average range. The restriction on them was not provided for under the SALT agreements. As part of a campaign aimed at protecting human rights, which intensified sharply in Western countries after the Helsinki process ended, the position of the Soviet Union became very tough. Accordingly, the United States has taken a number of retaliatory measures. After refusing to ratify the SALT-2 treaty in the early 80s, America deployed missiles (Pershing and cruise missiles) in Western Europe. They could reach the territory of the USSR. As a result, a military-strategic balance was established between the blocs.
Long-term consequences
The arms race negatively affected the economic condition of countries whose military-industrial orientation did not decrease. Parity with the USA, achieved before the Helsinki process began, concerned primarily ballistic intercontinental missiles. Since the late 70s. the general crisis began to negatively affect the defense industries. The USSR gradually began to lag behind in some types of weapons. This came to light after the appearance of "cruise missiles" in America. The lag became more apparent after the start of the development of the Strategic Defense Initiative program in the United States.