reading 1~36 what steps led to the cold war? who is responsible for the cold war?
TRANSCRIPT
Reading• 1~36• What steps led
to the Cold War?
• Who is responsible for the Cold War?
Lesson 1a – The Grand Alliance
Essential QuestionWhy did the Grand Alliance breakdown?Learning Outcomes - Students will:
o Preview – Why do you think the Grand Alliance was created?
o Learn about the Tehran and Yalta conferences
Success Criteria•I can create a table for the war conferences
Preview• According to the
cartoon, why the Grand Alliance created?
• Were these countries friends before?
Vocab• Tehran Conference• Yalta Conference• Allied Control Conference
Wartime Disagreements
• 1. The Second Front – Stalin demanded that the Allies open a ‘second front’ in Western Europe to relieve pressure of the Soviet Union. The USSR faced over 80% of all Nazi military resources.
• In 1942 and 1943, the UK and USA decided to invade North Africa and Italy first. These delays made Stalin suspicious, believing that the Allies wanted the USSR to be weakened.
Wartime Disagreements
• 2. Ideological Suspicions –Stalin had concerns over Roosevelt’s foreign policy.
• Roosevelt’s ‘Open Door’ policy was based on ‘free’ world trade and ‘equal’ access to raw materials – Stalin feared this would only benefit capitalist countries like the USA.
Tehran - Nov‘43
Yalta – Feb ‘45
Potsdam - July ‘45
State of the War
Germany
Poland
Eastern Europe
Japan
UN
State of Alliance?
The Tehran Conference -
Debates• State of the War – Allies are winning, but
Stalin demands a second front in Western Europe
• Germany – Debates over what to do with Germany. Differences stemmed from wartime experiences, ‘lessons’ from the failure of the ToV and differing ideologies. They only agreed that ‘unconditional surrender’ was the objective. Date set for Second Front – June 1944.
The Tehran Conference -
Debates• Poland – Stalin’s concern for ‘security’
led him to demand territory from Poland and a pro-Soviet government. Agreed that the USSR could keep territory seized in 1939, Poland would be compensated with land from Germany.
• Eastern Europe – Soviets demanded the right to keep territory they had seized between 1939-40 – The Baltic States, Finland & Romania. The USA and UK reluctantly agreed, despite this being against the Atlantic Charter.
The Tehran Conference -
Debates• Japan – The USA and UK tried to
convince Stalin to open up a Soviet ‘second front’ in Asia – Stalin refused until the war with Germany was won.
• The UN – British and Soviets agreed in principle to the US idea of a new international organisation to be established after the war. It would settle international disputes through collective security.
• Conclusions – The main positive outcomes included: agreement on the United Nations, and on the need for a weak post-war Germany.
How did the Tehran Conference effect
Superpower Relations?
Tehran - Nov‘43
Yalta – Feb ‘45
Potsdam
- July ‘45
State of the War
Allies are winning, but Stalin demands a second front in Western Europe
Germany Only accept unconditional surrender from Germany
PolandUSSR gets land gained in 1939 (for security) and Poland gets land from Germany
Eastern Europe
US and UK reluctantly accept that Soviets get to keep the land they gained in Eastern Europe
Japan Stalin refuses to open up a 2nd front in Asia until Germany is defeated
UN
British and Soviets agreed in principle to the US idea of a new international organisation to be established after the war.
State of Alliance?
Alliance is strong – agreed on most issues such as UN and a weak Germany
The Yalta Conference – Debates
• The State of the War – Germany was on verge of being defeated. The Second Front had begun with the Normandy Landings in 1944. The Allies were ready to invade Germany itself. The Japanese were preparing for the invasion of their homeland.
• Germany – Decided that Germany would be disarmed, demilitarised, de-Nazified and divided into four zones. This division would be temporary – Germany was to be run as ‘one country’. An Allied Control Commission (ACC) would govern Germany. Stalin demanded reparations – agreed $20 billion, 50% to USSR.
The Yalta Conference – Debates
• Poland – Eastern border was drawn at the ‘Curzon Line’ – its pre-Russo-Polish War (1921) border. Poland gained territory in the West from Germany along the ‘Oder-Neisse Line’. Stalin, now satisfied, agreed to promise ‘free elections’ for Poland.
• Eastern Europe – Stalin agreed that Eastern Europe would be able to have ‘free elections’. This was seen as a major victory for USA/UK.
The Yalta Conference – Feb 1945
• Japan – Stalin now promised to enter the war against Japan but demanded territory in return from Japan as ‘reward’
• United Nations – Stalin agreed that the USSR would join the UN. They would be a 5-permanent member Security Council, each with the power of veto.
• Conclusions – Main outcomes were the agreement on the United Nations; Soviet agreement to join the Pacific War; and the ‘Declaration for Liberated Europe’ pledging democratic governments and free elections in all European countries.
How did the Yalta Conference effect
Superpower Relations?
Tehran -
Nov‘43
Yalta – Feb ‘45
Potsdam
- July ‘45
State of the War
Alliance is strong – agreed on most issues such as UN and a weak Germany
Germany is almost defeated. Japan is about to be invaded
Germany Germany would be de-nazified and divided by the 4 Allies. USSR gets reparations
Poland Borders settled. ‘Free’ elections will be allowed in Poland
Eastern Europe
Stalin agrees to ‘free’ elections in Eastern Europe
Japan Stalin would enter the war, after Germany is defeated, but demands land
UN Stalin would join the UN and be apart of the security council with a veto vote
State of Alliance?
Alliance is strong – the West gets free elections and Russia gets land in Poland and reparations from Germany
Note-taking Check!• What I will check?
1. Vocab definition?2.Did you take notes
for today?Why did the Grand Alliance breakdown?
• Is the Grand Alliance strong after Yalta?
• Did you add 1~2 sentences?
• Did you add a vocab word?
If we do not answer
the essential
question in class,
your HW is to add
1~2 sentences after
each class
Lesson 1b – The Grand Alliance
Essential QuestionWhy did the Grand Alliance breakdown?Learning Outcomes - Students will:
o Review – State of the Grand Allianceo Learn about the effect of the Potsdam conference
on the Grand Alliance
Success Criteria•I can complete my table of the Wartime conferences
Review• What is the state of
the Grand Alliance after the Yalta conference?
• You obviously know what happens. Why do you think it falls apart
Vocab• London Poles• Lublin Poles• Potsdam Conference• Sphere of Influence
The Polish Question
• The London Poles – 100,000 Poles escaped from Poland in 1939 when they were invaded by Germany and the USSRo 1940 – moved to London
• The London Poles were opposed to any deals with the Soviets. o Opposed Yaltao Demanded Free elections
The Polish Question• The London Poles played a key role in
the 1944 Warsaw Rising. o When the Red Army reached Warsaw,
Polish Underground Forces, commanded by the London Poles, rose up against the Germans.
o Instead of assisting, Stalin ordered the Red Army to stop. The Nazis brutally put down the rebellion, killing almost 200,000 resistance fighters.
o The Soviets then moved in and ‘liberated’ Warsaw and Poland, putting their own government in place – the Lublin Poles.
The Polish Question• The Lublin Poles – Were a generally
pro-Soviet group. In July 1944, a ‘Committee of National Liberation’ was set-up in Soviet controlled Lublin in eastern Poland.
• They became known as the Lublin Committee, stating they wished to work with the Soviet Union.
• They agreed to the Curzon Line and other reforms. The USSR recognised this group as the only lawful authority in Poland and refused to work with the London Poles.
The Potsdam Conference
• The State of the War – Germany had surrendered and Japan was on the verge of defeat. The USA was planning to use its new atomic bomb against Japan.
• Germany – They agreed to deal with Germany in their own ways in their own zones. German economy to be run ‘as a whole’ but was limited to domestic industry and agriculture. USSR would receive 25% of their reparation bill from the Western Zones. Eastern zone would give food in exchange.
The Potsdam Conference• Poland – Truman was not happy
over Poland. He demanded that the Polish government be ‘re-organised’ – more London Poles within government and ‘free elections’.
• Eastern Europe – Truman was unhappy with the ‘percentages agreement’ between the UK/USSR. He didn’t want Eastern Europe to become a Soviet ‘sphere of influence’ – but he didn’t have any choice – Stalin was unwilling to budge. Stalin’s army is still in Eastern Europe and is rigging elections
The Potsdam Conference
• Japan –Truman did not tell Stalin the full story about the A-bomb and even boasted of his ‘new power’ to Stalin. Truman did not encourage Stalin to join the war against Japan.
• United Nations – UN became a reality and was officially created at the Treaty of San Francisco in 1945. The USA, USSR, France, Britain and Nationalist China would be the 5 permanent members.
How did the Potsdam Conference effect
Superpower Relations?
What is
different?
Tehran -
Nov‘43
Yalta – Feb ‘45
Potsdam - July ‘45
State of the War
Alliance is strong – agreed on most issues such as UN and a weak Germany
Alliance is strong – the West gets free elections and Russia gets land in Poland and reparations from Germany
Germany is defeated and Japan on the verge of defeat
Germany Each side deals with Germany in their own way
Poland Truman wants more London Poles in the new government, but is refused
Eastern Europe
Percentage Agreement creates a Sphere of Influence in E. Europe. Truman can do nothing to stop it
JapanTruman hints to Stalin about a new weapon (Stalin knows already) and doesn’t encourage Stalin to join the war in Japan
UN UN is officially started in San Francisco
State of Alliance?
Alliance is weak – Truman and Stalin disagree on what to do about Eastern Europe and Poland. Poland didn’t seem very free
Paper 2 - Exam Question 1 (2011)
• “The Potsdam Conference marked the end of the wartime alliance and laid the foundations for post-war hostility.”
With reference to the period up to 1949, to what extent do you agree with this statement? (20 marks)
Candidates are expected to address the causes of the Cold War in their answers to this question. Events up to the Potsdam Conference should be well known and it is likely that mention will be made of the introduction of Truman and Attlee (less on Attlee perhaps) to the peacemaking process as well as their relationship with Stalin. The structure of the question invites candidates to argue in favour and/or against the statement.
In agreement with the statement, candidates may argue that ideological differences were fundamental obstacles to continued cooperation once the common enemy was defeated. It may be that some candidates will go back to the 1917 revolution to support this analysis. This is acceptable as long as the focus remains firmly on the question. Candidates may also argue that Truman had a different approach from Roosevelt, which meant that US–Soviet relations were likely to worsen. Evidence for this may include Truman’s meeting with Molotov in April 1945 as well as Truman’s mention of a “new weapon” to Stalin at Potsdam. Also, disagreements over the future development of war-ravaged Germany could be mentioned, including the discussions over reparations and how these contributed to post-war tension.
Against the statement, it could be argued that by the meeting at Potsdam there was already an understanding among the Big Three that post-war Europe would be restructured along the lines of “spheres of influence”, as indicated by discussions at Teheran and Yalta. It was already clear that Stalin wanted new borders for the USSR and Poland, and the Moscow Conference of 1944 had touched upon “spheres of influence” throughout Eastern and Central Europe. The USSR had also agreed to join the United Nations and was planning to enter the war against Japan. The Allied Control Council was in place and Germany divided into zones of occupation. In this way, it could be argued that there was broad agreement on significant issues. Candidates may then go on to propose that it was not until 1946, or after, that relations worsened, and this argument could be supported by an analysis of the Long Telegram, Iron Curtain Speech, Truman Doctrine, COMECON, Berlin Blockade, etc.
Do not expect all of the above but do expect good factual supporting evidence. Historiography should complement rather than dominate the answer.
Paper 2 - Exam Question 2 (2009)
• For what reasons, and with what results, were there disagreements between participants at the conferences of
Yalta and Potsdam in 1945? (20 marks)Candidates should be able to explain why there were disagreements or grounds for possible antagonism between Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin at the conference of Yalta, and Attlee,
Truman and Stalin at Potsdam, which took place in order to plan for the situation at the end of the Second World War. The meeting at Yalta in the Crimea took place between 4–11th
February 1945. Among matters agreed were the disarmament and partition of Germany, the establishment of the United Nations, and the declaration by USSR of war on Japan after
Germany was defeated. The Potsdam Conference lasted from 17th July to 2nd August, 1945. It was confirmed that Germany should be temporarily divided into four occupation zones, but
political differences began to emerge. Reasons for disagreements could be: clash of personalities; different ideologies; past actions, before and during the war; mutual suspicion
and fear; illness; change of participants at Potsdam.
Policies which caused disagreement included: post-war settlement of Europe; treatment of Germany; reparations; Poland.
Results could include: break up of war time alliance; increase of mutual fear and suspicion; onset of the Cold War; division of Germany; establishment of Soviet satellite states.
N.B. if only one conference is mentioned mark out of [12 marks]. [0 to 7 marks] for vague general sweeping assertions.
[8 to 10 marks] for narrative accounts of the conferences, with implicit disagreements. [11 to 13 marks] for focus on reasons and result with explicit attention to disagreements.
[14 to 16 marks] for structured analysis of reasons, results and differences. [17 + marks] for perceptive analysis and perhaps different interpretations.
Note-taking Check!• What I will check?
1. Vocab definition?2.Did you take notes
for today?Why did the Grand Alliance breakdown?
• Why was there such a big change by Potsdam?
• Did you add 1~2 sentences?
• Did you add a vocab word?
If we do not answer
the essential
question in class,
your HW is to add
1~2 sentences after
each class