Race wars of the 20th century. Russia in the wars of the 20th century

Since early XIX century until the beginning of the 20th century Russian Empire many important events took place. In particular, several emperors changed, it was canceled serfdom, and the authority of the monarchy fell below its possible limit, which led to the rise of communist ideals.

During this century, the Russian Empire fought many wars, trying to maintain and expand its own borders. Relations with Turkey, with which Russia managed to fight three times, looked especially tense.

Against the backdrop of constant international conflicts, the country’s authority also increased. The Russian Empire became one of the leaders in the international arena, which forced European states to closely monitor the ups and downs foreign policy in the country.

By tracking the main military events of a given century, it is possible not only to identify the most problematic aspects of international relations, but also to determine the views of the world of the ruler himself who is in power in a particular period.

The table below names not only the main military events that occurred over the century, but also presents the names of the main commanders with a list of the results of military operations.

What a war	Opponents		Main battles	Russian commanders	Peaceful agreement
Russian-Iranian war. 1804-1813. +		To defend and strengthen Russia’s position in Transcaucasia.	Protracted struggle in Northern Azerbaijan.	P.D. Tsitsianov, I.I. Zavalishin, I.V. Gudovich, A.P. Tormasov, F.O. Paulucci, P.S. Kotlyarevsky.	Gulistan Peace Treaty.
Russian-Turkish war. 1806-1812. +	Ottoman Empire.	To defend and strengthen Russia’s position in Transcaucasia. Contribute to strengthening Russian influence in the Balkan region.	13.11 - 12.12.1806 - Russian forces captured the fortresses of Khotyn, Iasi, Bendery, and the city of Bucharest. 06/2/1807 - victory over the troops of Ali Pasha at Obilesti.	I.I. Mikhelson, M.A. Milorado-vich.	Bucharest Peace Treaty.
			05/10/11/1807 - the Turkish fleet was defeated in the Dardanelles naval battle. 19.06 - in the Athos naval battle, the Turkish fleet is put to flight.	D.N. Senyavin.
			September - October 1810 - Russian forces take Rushchuk, Zhurzha, Turno, Nikopol, Plevna.	N.M. Kamensky 2nd.
			06/22/1811 - the army of Ahmed Pasha was defeated at Rushchuk. 8-11.10 - Turtukai and Silistria were taken. 25.10 - surrender of the Turkish army.	M.I. Kutuzov.
Russian-Swedish war. 1808-1809.		Establishing full control over the Gulf of Finland and the Gulf of Bothnia. Territorial increments.	03/1/1809 - the Åland Islands were taken. 6-7.03 - a Cossack detachment crosses the ice to the Scandinavian coast and occupies the city of Grisselgam, close to Stockholm.	P.I. Bagration, M.B. Barclay de Tolly, Ya.P. Kulnev.	Treaty of Friedrichsham.
Russian-Iranian war. 1826-1828.		Repel Iranian aggression provoked by England.	09/13/1826 - the troops of Abbas Mirza and Allayar Khan were defeated near Elizavetpol. 06/26/1827 Nakhichevan was occupied. 7.07 - Abbas-Abad fortress. 4.09-10.10 - successful siege of Erivan. January 1828 - Russian troops are sent to Tehran, which forces the Shah to hastily ask for peace.	I.F. Paskevich.	Turkmanchay Peace Treaty.
Russian-Turkish war. 1828-1829. +	Ottoman Empire.	Russia sought to strengthen its position in the Balkans and establish control over the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits.	06/23/1828 - the Transcaucasian fortress of Kare fell. 23.07 - Akhalkalaki fortress was taken. 16.08 - Akhaltsikhi fortress. 06/27/1829 - Erzurum was captured.	I.F. Paskevich.
			05/30/1829 - a crushing defeat of the Turks at the village of Kulevchi in Bulgaria. 13.07 - the first Turkish army is defeated near the city of Aidos. 07/31 - the second army is defeated near the city of Slivno. 7.08 - Adrianople is busy.	I.I. Dibich, F.V. Ridiger.	Treaty of Adrianople.
Crimean War	Ottoman Empire, Sardinian kingdom.	Nicholas I sought to take over the “legacy of a sick man” (the possessions of the decrepit Turkish Empire): the Mediterranean straits, the territory of the Balkan Peninsula.	11/5/1853 - in the first naval battle in the history of mankind steam ships The Turkish steam frigate Pervaz-Bahri was defeated.	G.I. Butakov.	Treaty of Paris
			11/18 - Turkish sailing ships are completely defeated in Sinop Bay.	P.S. Nakhimov.
			09/01/1854 - Anglo-French troops land near Evpatoria. 8.09 - The Allies defeat the Russians at the Battle of the Alma River. 13.10 - victory over the English cavalry near Balaklava. 24.10 - defeat of Russian forces in the battle on the Akkerman Plateau.	A.S. Menshikov.
			09/15/1854-08/27/1855 - the heroic defense of Sevastopol, which ended with its forced surrender.	P.S. Nakhimov, V.I. Istomin, E.I. Totleben, V.A. Kornilov.
			11/16/1855 - the Turkish fortress of Kare was taken.	YES. Muravyov.
Russian-Turkish war. 1877-1878. +	Ottoman Empire.	The desire to restore Russian influence on Turkey and support the national liberation movement of the Slavic population of the Balkans.	August - December 1877 - Russian troops were able to defend the positions occupied in the Shipka Pass area. 28.11 - the garrison capitulates Plevna fortress. 23.12 - Sofia is busy.	I.V. Gurko.	San Stefano preliminary peace, subsequently adjusted (not in favor of Russia) by the decisions of the Berlin Congress.
			27-28.12 — brilliant victory over the Turks in the battle of Shey-novo.	F.F. Radetsky, M.D. Skobelev, N.I. Svyatopolk-Mirsky.
			01/14-16/1878 - Russian forces approach Adrianople.	I.V. Gurko, F.F. Radetzky.
Russo-Japanese War. 1904-1905.		The need for a “small victorious war” to strengthen tsarism. The importance of maintaining Russia's protectorate over Korea, the concession for the construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway and the lease of the Liaodong Peninsula. The Japanese were pushed towards war with Russia by England and the USA.	01/26/1904 - the death of the cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets" in the port of Chemulpo. 27.01 - attack by Japanese ships on the Portarthur squadron.	The death of the commander of the Pacific Fleet, the outstanding naval commander Admiral SO. Makarova.	Treaty of Portsmouth.
			11 -21.08 - the battle of Liaoyang brought defeat to the Russian ground army. 09.22-04.10 - battle on the Shchakhe River, which did not bring victory to either side.	A.N. Kuropatkin.

1. Yuri

   Where is the Patriotic War of 1812?

2. julia

   That's it!!

3. Naska

   A Caucasian war??

4. Vadim

   WITH Ottoman Empire fought 4 times - on average every 20 years. And each time the war turned into major defeats for the Ottomans.

5. Rjvbccfh

   Of course, cover all military campaigns and local conflicts on the borders Empire XIX century is quite difficult. The picture lines up well if it is divided into theaters of war. For example: western direction, separately Caucasus. Central Asian campaigns, as well as conflicts with China in the Far East.

6. Guest

   Apparently, the one who compiled this “table” is clearly not a patriot of our country - Russia. After reading this material I see only negativity and the desire to show what royal Russia She was aggressive and didn’t say a word about the reasons. About the fact that she was forced to enter into wars imposed on her by European countries. You, Mr. Compiler, are either ignorant or a vile traitor.

   The indignant “patriots” still have to learn and learn the materiel, and it’s time to decide: if you don’t have enough intelligence to understand that the Motherland, alas, is not a popular doll, but the state is the aggressor, then you are a patriotic SUCK! If we understand and approve of everything, then there is no need to look for fascists and terrorists somewhere, look in the mirror!
   And the compilers of the table, guys. They were still modest and LACKED HEROISM! Where are the almost annual campaigns in Europe within the framework of the “anti-Napoleonic coalitions”? Did Suvorov storm the Ural passes? But these attacks provoked Boinapartie to snap back at least once. Don't be them. and there would have been no war in 1812. Where are the aggressive campaigns in Central Asia? Capture of Khiva, Bukhara, Samarkand,
   finally - Chinese Gulja (!). And who suppressed the “Boxer” uprising in China and, on the sly, grabbed all of Manchuria (along with the “purely Russian” city of Vladivostok), Mother Russia? Was it not Platov’s 20,000-strong Cossack corps who moved towards the Indian Okiyan in 1801 to defend the borders of their homeland? What about Poland and Hungary?……. WHY DO WE NOT SING THE SONG ANYMORE “DO THE RUSSIANS WANT WARS?” ???!!!

7. Elena

   I would like to know what you want and who you are. You are not just not patriots. You are not Russian. Don't go to grandma's. That is why hatred and envy come out of you. The Russians beat you and will beat you if you do shit. We provoked Napoleon. This needs to be invented!!! And I don’t sing many good songs. I don’t eat Kalinka, I don’t eat birch trees in the field. Readers. Do you want to provoke a revolution? Do you want brotherly blood? Defame the people and the government? They took place in the last century!

So, our topic is “Russia and the wars of the 20th century.” The twentieth century, unfortunately, was very tense and eventful big amount various wars and military conflicts. Suffice it to say that at the very beginning of the twentieth century the Russo-Japanese War took place, then two world wars: the first and the second. In the twentieth century there were only 450 major local wars and armed conflicts. After each war, agreements and treaties were concluded, peoples and governments hoped for long-term peace. There was no shortage of large quantities statements and incantations against wars and for the creation of a sustainable world. But, unfortunately, wars arose again and again.

In the end, we need to think about why these wars happened and whether it is possible to make sure that there are at least fewer of them. There is such a famous historian, academician Chernyak, who wrote in one of his books that all these wars were unnecessary development costs human society. That all these wars and conflicts did not contribute to the resolution of the contradictions that gave rise to them and gave practically nothing. You can probably say this about many wars and conflicts, but there were also wars, say, the Great Patriotic War, in which the fate of not only our country, but also all of humanity was decided. Will humanity be enslaved by fascism, Nazism, or will there be a progressive development of the human community. Therefore, for example, the Great Patriotic War had worldwide historical significance, because its fruits relate to the destinies of all peoples. By the way, and German people, and the Japanese people, who, after the defeat of fascism, had the opportunity to develop in a completely different way. And, I must say, they succeeded in many ways.

Each war had its own reasons. There were, of course, general reasons, which boiled down to territorial claims. But speaking generally, many wars, even if you look earlier in history, for example, the crusades in the Middle East, were covered up by ideological and religious reasons. But, as a rule, wars had deep economic roots. The First World War began between two coalitions, at first eight countries took part in it, and at the end of the war - already 35. In total, 10 million people died in the First World War, and countries participated in the war with peoples who numbered almost one and a half billion people . The war went on for four years. And you know that it ended with the victory of the Entente countries; the United States of America, France, and Great Britain enriched themselves most in this war. And the situation was most difficult in the defeated countries, primarily in Germany. A large indemnity was imposed on Germany, and the inner circles of Germany played heavily on this. For example, in the twenties, whether they sold beer, wine, or bread in stores, they wrote everywhere: the price is, say, 10 marks, the indemnity costs 5 or 6 marks.

And so the population was forced to feel and realize that they were living poorly only because such heavy indemnities were imposed on the country by the Treaty of Versailles. There was huge unemployment. The economy was in a dire situation, and nationalist forces played on this. This ultimately contributed to the rise of Nazism to power. And Hitler back in the twenties in his book “ Mein Kampf” wrote that the original dream and original plan of Germany is a march to the east. Could World War II have been prevented? Probably, if the Western countries, together with the Soviet Union, had more consistently followed the path of curbing the aggressor, and acted as a united front against the impending aggression, perhaps something could have been done. But in general, the situation from today’s heights shows that the aspirations and expansion to the east of fascism, of Hitler, were so deeply embedded in German politics that it was almost impossible to prevent this expansion. This was also facilitated by the fact that after the October Revolution, and even thanks to calls for world revolution and the overthrow of capitalism in all countries, the West became very hostile and wary of the Soviet Republic and did everything to push Hitler to the East, while they themselves remained aside. The mood of that time is very clearly shown by Truman's statement. At the beginning of the war, he was the vice president of the United States of America and said back in 1941, when Hitler attacked us, that if Germany wins, we must help the Soviet Union, if the Soviet Union wins, we must help Germany, let them kill each other as many friends as possible, so that America will later find itself, together with other Western countries, arbiters of world destiny.

The motives and goals, of course, were far from the same. Because Germany set as its goal the conquest of territory Soviet Union and other eastern regions, establishing world domination and establishing fascist ideology throughout the world. But the goals of the Soviet Union were completely different: to protect their country and other countries from fascism. Underestimating the threat of fascism in the first couple of years led to the fact that Western countries in every possible way pushed Hitler to the east, and this, of course, made it possible for a war to break out. in full the second world war. They also talk about the guilt of the Soviet Union; in the West and in our country there are a lot of books that talk about this. An objective assessment shows that our country, no matter what it was called, was not interested in starting the Second World War. And the leadership of our country did everything to delay the start of the war and, at least, to protect our country so that it would not be drawn into this war. Of course, our country has had its mistakes. Insufficient flexibility, especially in relations with England, France, relations with the old democratic parties in Germany - many different mistakes were made. But still, objectively, our country was not interested in this war, and the same Stalin, not wanting to provoke a war, agreed to conclude a non-aggression treaty with Germany in August 1939. And even on June 21, when it became obvious that Hitler will attack, he, still thinking that the war could be delayed, did not allow troops to be brought into combat readiness. In 1941, units of the Red Army were in a peacetime situation. On the morning of the 22nd, a directive was issued by Headquarters supreme command repel aggression, but under no circumstances cross the border. There are many fabrications that the Soviet Union itself was preparing the attack, that Hitler forestalled it. How can a ruler who wants to attack, on the first day of war, give the order to repel aggression, and state border not to cross?!

How does the logic of guilt and non-guilt for the outbreak of war, expectation and non-expectation of war relate to your thesis that the First World War, at least, had economic reasons or reasons.

Not just the First World War. I repeat once again that almost all wars ultimately had economic interests and were hidden behind ideological and religious motives. If we talk about the First World War, the war was mainly about the redistribution of colonies, regions of capital investment and the seizure of other territories. The First World War is also interesting in that until now not a single historian can explain why Russia fought there. They say: Bosphorus, Dardanelles, straits. Russia lost four million people in the First World War - what, for the sake of these straits? Before this, Russia had the opportunity to take possession of these straits more than once, but England and other countries were not interested in Russia doing this, so they resisted this in every possible way.

Thank you for bringing me to one of the main issues that I want to report to you. The fact is that the Second World War, unlike many wars, including the First World War, had significant features. Take the Russo-Japanese War. They say that we lost this war, but by the way, the war was not lost by the Russians to the Japanese at all. We lost a number of battles, and only conditionally. Because as soon as they entered the flank of the army Japanese troops, the Russian army was retreating. Not even defeated yet. There was such a defective tactic and strategy. But Russia had full opportunity fight against Japan. Why did Russia stop the war? She was pushed to do this whole line countries, the same France and England pushed Russia to get involved in the war in the east and weaken its position in the west. Germany especially tried in this regard.

The First World War was fought by France and England over Alsace, Lorraine, Russia - they said that for the straits, i.e. in this war, one side or another could lose or gain some pieces of its territory. In contrast to this, the Second World War, especially what relates to our side and the Great Patriotic War, had the peculiarity that in this war it was not about individual territories and some unfortunate interests. It wasn't even about the life and death of statehood alone. After all, if you take the Ost plan, developed by Rosenberg, Goering and others, approved by Hitler, then it directly says, and this is a secret report, and not some propaganda document: “to destroy 30-40 million Jews, Slavic and other peoples” . 30-40 million is the plan! It says that in conquered territories no one should have more than four classes of education. Today, some narrow-minded people write in the newspapers that it would be better if Hitler won, we would drink beer and live better than we live now. If the one who dreams so much were alive, he would be in best case scenario was a swineherd for the Germans. And the vast majority of people would have died altogether. Therefore, we were not talking about some territories, but we were talking, I repeat once again, about the life and death of our state and all our peoples. Therefore, the war was fought in such a way as to defeat the enemy at any cost - there was no other way out.

When the danger of fascism was already realized, this led to the creation of an anti-Hitler coalition between England, France and the United States of America. This had exclusively great importance and largely prevented the superiority of forces and victory in the Second World War. Military actions from outside Western countries at first they were limited, you know that the war began in 1939, Hitler attacked us in 1941, and the Normandy operation and the second front in Europe were opened only in June 1944. But we must pay tribute that especially the United States of America helped us a lot with Lend-Lease. They gave us about 22 thousand aircraft. This accounted for 18% of our aircraft production, because during the war we produced more than 120 thousand aircraft. Approximately 14% of the tanks we had were given to us by Lend-Lease; in total, it gave us approximately 4% of our gross product for the entire war. It was a big help. I will say that cars were especially useful to us; we received 427 thousand good cars such as Studebakers, Jeeps, and jeeps. Very passable vehicles, after receiving them the mobility of our troops increased sharply. AND offensive operations 43, 44, 45 years were largely mobile and successful due to the fact that we acquired so many cars.

Can the wars of the 20th century be viewed as one war in terms of the goals of rivals and allies?

They said that the Soviet Union after the Second World War was a threat. That's what they said - there is a Soviet military threat. Fearing this threat, NATO was created. The biggest concern was the communist ideology. The desire for a world revolution, although the leadership of our country practically abandoned the idea of ​​a world revolution already in the 30s.

Already in the 30s, Stalin’s entire policy boiled down to creating a strong national state. As a support for workers and peasants around the world. Now they say that with the beginning of the war, Stalin remembered Alexander Nevsky, Kutuzov, Suvorov, and began to attract the church, but this is not true. We lived in those years, and I know, and you can find out from books: films about Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, Alexander Nevsky were created in the 30s. Therefore, there was no longer any talk about this world revolution. It is no coincidence that the Cominterns were dissolved during the war. Now remember the years of perestroika, the Cold War formally ended. We are told that we were defeated in the Cold War. Let's think about it, what kind of defeat? Warsaw Pact disbands, troops are withdrawn from Germany and other regions, we liquidate our bases. Has anyone given us ultimatums? Has anyone demanded that we do this? Our leaders were deeply mistaken. In their hearts, some of them, perhaps, thought that if we took such steps, the West would also take reciprocal steps. NATO, for example, is being transformed into a political, rather than military, organization. Someone believed that if we liquidated our bases in Cuba, then the American base at Guantanamo would also be liquidated. There were some hopes for this. We abandoned the communist ideology, well, in general, everything that they in the West never dreamed of, we have done. And in 1994, when we celebrated our fiftieth anniversary Normandy operation, invited all countries, including Australia, Poland, Luxembourg, and from Russia, already democratic, new Russia, no one was officially invited.

I answer your question: in the West, apart from everything else, hostility towards Russia has been so deep-rooted from time immemorial that they can make the right statements, but this tendency gradually makes itself felt. In this regard, Alexander Nevsky was a very wise man when he went to Golden Horde conclude an agreement, and directed all his strength to fight against the Prussian knights. Why? There, in the east, they only demanded tribute. No one touched the Church, the language, culture, spiritual life of the Russian people and other peoples, no one encroached on it. And the knights Germanized everything following the example of the Baltic republics: religion and spiritual life were imposed. Therefore, Alexander believed that main danger where it comes from. I don't think it's necessary to exaggerate this. Maybe even I’m not right about everything here, but there are too many similar facts of hostile attitude towards Russia, not on the part of everyone, of course, in the West, but on the part of certain circles, that one has to think about this matter today.

Allow me to return to the Second World War and say that the war was even more difficult in its consequences. 10 million people were mobilized, 55 million people died worldwide, of which 26.5 million Soviet people, citizens of our country. And the Soviet Union, our country, bore the brunt of the war. Due to political miscalculations, the beginning of the war was not successful for us. Since the topic of my lecture talks about the experience and lessons of wars, one of the lessons is as follows. From the Crimean War to the present day, 150 years in total, politicians have put the country and its armed forces in an intolerable position. You will remember how in the Crimean War the defeat of Russia and its armed forces was politically, externally politically, determined. There is nothing to say about the Russo-Japanese War. In the First World War, essentially, we fought for alien interests, becoming dependent on France, England and other countries.

Now, look how the war began for us in 1941. In an effort to delay the war through political methods, Stalin ignored military-strategic considerations. Even today, some people really like to flaunt politics. Yes, indeed, war is a continuation of politics by violent means. Politics is of paramount importance, but the inverse influence of military strategy on politics can never be denied. Politicians in pure form doesn't exist at all. Politics is viable when it takes into account economic, ideological, and military-strategic considerations. And just at the beginning of the war we lost 3.5 million people and ended up in difficult situation essentially because, politically, the armed forces were placed in a completely intolerable position. I think that no army in the world could bear this.

Take Afghanistan, some big people still say: “We didn’t plan to capture anything in Afghanistan, we wanted to become garrisons and stand there.” Sorry, this is stupid. If you go to a country where there is a civil war and you take a certain side, say, the government, who will leave you alone? And from the very first days I had to intervene in the situation. There was an uprising in Herat, the entire local government was overthrown, it must be defended! By the way, Marshal Sokolov held a meeting there and said: “I’m warning you, our army didn’t come here to fight, no matter what.” fighting don't get involved." On the second day, the vice president comes to him: “There is an uprising in Herat, our artillery was captured, the local rulers were arrested, what should we do?” Sokolov says: “Okay, we’ll allocate a battalion,” and so it went. But couldn’t it have been foreseen in advance, is your desire not to be drawn into the battle enough? You will be drawn into this battle.

In Chechnya, there was every opportunity to avoid starting this war in 1994. Many problems could have been solved politically - no, they were drawn into war with great ease. Moreover, what’s interesting is that we’ve been standing there for almost 10 years, because not only has a state of war not been declared, no state of emergency, there is no martial law. After all, soldiers and officers must fight, they must carry out tasks, defend themselves when they are attacked, and many of their actions, especially the use of weapons, become difficult. Because there is neither martial law nor a state of emergency. Politically, very often our armed forces were placed in a very difficult position. Let politics rule, but we need to think about the responsibility of politics so that it takes into account all life circumstances.

I just want to tell you that often in classrooms where young people are present, they ask: “Some say this, others say that, and all the academics, who to believe?” Believe, first of all, yourself. Study the facts, study history, compare these events and facts, and draw your own conclusions, then no one will lead you astray. Take Afghanistan, when in those years someone else tried to justify sending our troops there by saying that if we had not come there, the Americans would have come there. This was all ridiculed in the most sarcastic way: “What are the Americans supposed to do there?” And then, indeed, it was a little funny. But take life as it is now: the Americans came to Afghanistan. Therefore, such questions cannot be dismissed so easily.

Looking ahead, I will say that on the whole I consider the introduction of troops into Afghanistan to be our mistake. A political mistake. It was possible to find other ways, in Angola and other places, to step on the Americans’ toes and refuse to interfere in Afghan affairs. By the way, when the Politburo discussed the question of whether to send troops to Afghanistan, the only person who resolutely opposed such a decision, was the Chief of the General Staff, Marshal Agarkov. Andropov immediately interrupted him: “Your job is to solve military problems, but we have someone to deal with politics.” And such political arrogance, do you know how it ended? We did not need to send troops there; we could provide assistance and disguise some actions, as the Chinese acted in Korea, as the actions of volunteers. Different shapes could be found. But direct input was a mistake. I'll tell you why. In politics, any military intervention is very important. Whether you send a platoon or an army into a foreign country, the political resonance is the same. You sent troops into foreign territory. The rest doesn't matter. That's why we told Marshal Agarkov: if we go, then in 30-40 divisions. Come, immediately close the border with Iran, close the border with Pakistan so that no help comes from there, and we could withdraw troops from there in 2-3 years.

The worst decisions in politics are inconsistent, half-hearted decisions. If you have already made a mistake and are taking some kind of political step, then it must be decisive, consistent, carried out using the most powerful means, then there are fewer victims and mistakes pay off faster.

You probably think, like I do, that the Second World War ended in our victory. Although people like Yakovlev, Afanasyev at the Russian State University for the Humanities, and many others write that it was a shameful war, that we were defeated in it, and so on. Let's still think about why? We are often told that this is a defeat because our losses are large. Solzhenitsyn says 60 million, there are “writers” who say 20, 30 million - hence the defeat. This is all presented under the guise of humanity. But how has history always determined: defeat or victory? This was always determined by what goals one side or another pursued. Hitler's goal was to destroy our country, seize territory, conquer our peoples, and so on. How did it end? What was our goal? We set a goal to protect our country, protect our people, and provide assistance to other peoples who were enslaved by fascism. How did it end? All of Hitler's plans collapsed. It was not Hitler’s troops that came to Moscow and Leningrad, but ours that came to Berlin, the allies came to Rome and Tokyo. What kind of defeat is this? The losses are big, unfortunately. We lost 26.5 million people.

But our military losses were less, I can report this to you authoritatively, I was the chairman of the state commission to determine and clarify losses. We have been working in this area for four years. The work was completed back in 1985. We went to the Central Committee of the CPSU and the government of our country several times and proposed to publish accurate data so that no one would speculate on them. When I left for Afghanistan in 1989, this report still made it to the Central Committee. Look at the magazine “Istochnik”, it is published there who imposed what resolutions. Gorbachev wrote: “study, report proposals.” What does the same Yakovlev write? “Wait, we still need to involve civilian demographers,” and there were already 45 people on the commission - the largest civilian and military demographers worked. What are the real losses? Our military losses amount to 8.6 million people. The remaining 18 million are civilians exterminated in the occupied territories as a result of fascist atrocities. Six million Jews were exterminated. What are these, troops or what? These are civilians.

The Germans, along with their allies, lost 7.2 million people. The difference in our losses is approximately one to one and a half million people. What caused this difference? The Germans themselves write and it has been proven that there were about five million of our people in captivity. They gave us back about two million. We have the right to ask today, where are the 3 million of our people who were captured in Germany? Fascist atrocities led to the death of these 3 million people in captivity. We had about 2.5 million Germans in captivity. We returned about 2 million people after the war. And if we speak in soldierly terms, when we came to Germany in 1945 and the whole army capitulated to us German army- if we competed to see who would destroy the most, it wouldn’t be difficult to kill both civilians and military personnel, killing as many as we needed. But after 3-4 days the German troops began to release them from captivity, except for the SS men, frankly speaking, just so as not to feed them. Our people and our army could never just destroy people after we had already come with victory. Now they even want to turn the humanity of our people against us - this is simply blasphemous. This is simply a great sin against those people who fought. Which you often condone by spreading such false rumors and all sorts of spells.

In general, I must tell you, friends, that the history of the Great Patriotic War is being falsified now. Now all the results of the Second World War have been trampled underfoot. They spread all sorts of lies. The same Izvestia published on the eve of the 60th anniversary of the Battle of Kursk that the Germans lost 5 tanks in the Battle of Kursk. We lost, as it says, 334 tanks. As I told you, compare the facts and decide for yourself who is right. Could it be that the Germans lost only 5 tanks and began to flee along the Dnieper, instead of going to Moscow? But ours, having lost 300 tanks, for some reason are moving forward and not retreating. Is it really possible? They say that we fought mediocrely, our generals and commanders were useless, unlike the old, educated and competent Russian noble officers. Georgy Vladimov wrote a book about Vlasov, “The General and His Army.” We don’t yet have a single novel about Zhukov or Rokossovsky, but several books have already been written about Vlasov, glorifying him. But we must judge by deeds. After all, after the Patriotic War of 1812, 150-200 years - every war, then defeat. The Great Patriotic War is the first greatest war, where the greatest victory was won. By the way, the white generals even ruined the civil war. Now, for example, they want to glorify Kolchak and Wrangel. Pay tribute, they say they also fought for Russia. But you must always remember one difference: Frunze and Chapaev fought not only against the White Guards, but also against the interventionists. Wrangel, Kolchak and others were kept by the interventionists; they fought against Russia on the side of foreigners. There is probably a difference for those people who respect their country.

There are people who tell us every day that there are no threats to Russia now. There are no threats, no one threatens us, we only threaten ourselves.

What determines whether there is a threat or not? It depends on what policy you are pursuing. If you pursue an independent and independent policy, this policy can always encounter contradictions with the policies of other countries. Then there may be aggravations, there may be threats, there may be an attack. If you give up everything and don’t defend your national interests, that’s right, there are no threats. Once you give everything up, what are the threats that could happen, other than you losing everything? Unfortunately, today's threats are very serious; if you concentrate, there are three of them.

First. The situation today is such that a large-scale nuclear war, for which we were preparing several decades ago, is becoming unlikely. And in general, a large-scale war becomes unlikely, which is why other ways to achieve political goals have been invented: economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, information war. One can conquer one country after another through subversive actions from within. And there is no need to take risks, because a major war could lead to the use of nuclear weapons. They found other ways, not the least of which was money, as was the case in Iraq, where almost everyone was bought. Therefore, the priority task of the armed forces now is to be prepared for local wars and conflicts and, probably, some certain readiness for big war, if small conflicts grow.

Second. Eat nuclear powers, and the nuclear weapons of all these countries are aimed at our country. France, England, America. China has nuclear weapons, where else can they be used? Chinese nuclear weapons still do not reach America, which means they are aimed against our country. This is a serious threat, it has become less than 10-15 years ago, but it exists, you can’t escape it.

Third. There are large groups of armed forces at all our borders foreign countries. They are slightly reduced quantitatively, but are greatly transformed qualitatively. High-precision weapons appear and much more that you have heard about.

There are such threats. What kind of army is needed in this regard? We are told: mobile, strong, well-equipped, but the first problem is weapons. Our weapons are aging, the military industry is in decline, and we cannot now produce and equip our army and navy in sufficient quantities the latest weapons. This is putting it mildly.

The second is our military art and methods of conducting combat operations. In addition to reliable scientific information, there is a lot of misinformation out there. When we are told that in modern conditions, when the enemy has such types of weapons, the war will be one-sided and it will be useless to resist, it is better to give up and capitulate. By the way, recently one American general spoke in Hamburg, at the German Military Academy, and said, “now the school of Clausewitz, Moltke, Zhukov, Foch has died, there is one school - the American one, which everyone must comprehend, then you will win.” They say that the Soviet, Russian school was buried in Iraq. They can say whatever they want, but just think about it, what school of ours has anyone used in Iraq? Remember how Leningrad, Moscow, Stalingrad were defended: barricades, barriers, trenches, people fought for every house. Was this somewhere in Iraq? And the whole secret is that our Soviet, Russian school to apply requires great moral strength. Adequate morale is needed. Some people here think that all this happens on its own. But moral strength, this human capital, must be accumulated all the time, and when people are told that defense is not needed, that not everyone has to serve in the army, then not only do we not accumulate this moral potential, we lose it.

Remember the Brest Fortress. After all, it so happened that there were no plans to leave military units to defend the fortress at all - they went to their own lines. But there were still people there who had returned from vacation, the sick, and the families of military personnel. They immediately gathered and began to defend the fortress. Nobody gave them such a task to defend the fortress, the Germans were already near Minsk, and they whole month are fighting. Today we must not forget in what way and under what circumstances such education of our army and people was achieved. Now look, they say here that it is difficult to serve, so the conscription should be abolished and everything reduced to contract service. But our guys, from our country, where it is so difficult to serve, go to Israel and spend three years there, where the service is even more severe than here, and serve with pleasure. It all depends on how a person treats his country. We shouldn’t forget about this either.

AND last question in connection with the recruitment of the army. We have now taken the line to create a predominantly contract army. But it is no better, because in Israel it is no coincidence that people do not take this path. The same Vietnam showed the Americans: contract soldiers serve well in peacetime. But someone who is threatened with death does not need either money or benefits when entering a university. That is why the Germans do not refuse conscription. Still, a connection between the people and the army is needed: so that the serviceman does not break away from his people, from his relatives, from his land. It is very important that a conscription system, especially in wartime, exists.

Why do they want to switch to contract service? It’s just that in 2007-2008 we will have such a demographic situation that there will be no one to conscript. If we don’t start training and recruiting contract soldiers now, we will be left without an army altogether. Therefore, it is necessary to combine this contract system and conscription service, while reducing the conscription period to at least one year. The army is created not only by officers and generals, it is created by the entire people, and you know this from our entire history.

References:

To prepare this work, materials from the site http://www.bestreferat.ru were used

The twentieth century is “rich” in events such as bloody wars, destructive man-made disasters, and severe natural disasters. These events are terrible both in the number of casualties and the extent of damage.

The most terrible wars of the 20th century

Blood, pain, mountains of corpses, suffering - this is what the wars of the 20th century brought. In the last century, wars took place, many of which can be called the most terrible and bloodiest in the entire history of mankind. Large-scale military conflicts continued throughout the twentieth century. Some of them were internal, and some involved several states at the same time.

World War I

The beginning of the First World War practically coincided with the beginning of the century. Its causes, as is known, were laid at the end of the nineteenth century. The interests of the opposing allied blocs collided, which led to the start of this long and bloody war.

Thirty-eight of the fifty-nine states that existed in the world at that time were participants in the First World War. We can say that almost the whole world was involved in it. Having begun in 1914, it ended only in 1918.

Russian Civil War

After the revolution took place in Russia, the Civil War began in 1917. It continued until 1923. In Central Asia, pockets of resistance were extinguished only in the early forties.

In this fratricidal war, where the Reds and the Whites fought among themselves, according to conservative estimates, about five and a half million people died. It turns out that the Civil War in Russia claimed more lives than all the Napoleonic wars.

The Second World War

The war that began in 1939 and ended in September 1945 was called World War II. It is considered the worst and most destructive war of the twentieth century. Even according to conservative estimates, at least forty million people died in it. It is estimated that the number of victims could reach seventy-two million.

Of the seventy-three states that existed in the world at that time, sixty-two states took part in it, that is, about eighty percent of the planet’s population. We can say that this world war is the most global, so to speak. The Second World War was fought on three continents and four oceans.

Korean War

The Korean War began at the end of June 1950 and continued until the end of July 1953. It was a confrontation between South and North Korea. In essence, this conflict was a proxy war between two forces: the PRC and the USSR on the one hand, and the USA and their allies on the other.

The Korean War was the first military conflict where two superpowers clashed in a limited area without using nuclear weapons. The war ended after the signing of a truce. There are still no official statements about the end of this war.

The worst man-made disasters of the 20th century

Man-made disasters occur from time to time in different parts of the planet, taking away human lives, destroying everything around, often causing irreparable harm to the surrounding nature. There are known disasters that resulted in the complete destruction of entire cities. Similar disasters occurred in the oil, chemical, nuclear and other industries.

Chernobyl accident

One of the worst man-made disasters of the last century is considered to be the explosion at Chernobyl nuclear power plant. As a result of that terrible tragedy which happened in April 1986, a huge amount of radioactive material was released into the atmosphere, and the fourth power unit of the nuclear plant was completely destroyed.

In history nuclear power this disaster is regarded as the largest of its kind both in terms of economic damage and the number of victims and deaths.

Bhopal disaster

In early December 1984, a disaster occurred at a chemical plant in the city of Bhopal (India), which was later called the Hiroshima of the chemical industry. The plant produced products that destroyed insect pests.

Four thousand people died on the day of the accident, another eight thousand within two weeks. Almost five hundred thousand people were poisoned an hour after the explosion. The reasons for this terrible disaster were never installed.

Piper Alpha oil rig disaster

In early July 1988, a powerful explosion occurred on the Piper Alpha oil platform, causing it to completely burn down. This disaster is considered the largest in the oil industry. After a gas leak and subsequent explosion, out of two hundred and twenty-six people, only fifty-nine survived.

The worst natural disasters of the century

Natural disasters can cause no less harm to humanity than major man-made disasters. Nature is stronger than man, and periodically it reminds us of this.

We know from history about major natural disasters that occurred before the beginning of the twentieth century. Today's generation has witnessed many natural disasters that occurred already in the twentieth century.

Cyclone Bola

In November 1970, the deadliest tropical cyclone ever recorded struck. It covered the territory of Indian West Bengal and eastern Pakistan (today it is the territory of Bangladesh).

The exact number of victims of the cyclone is unclear. This figure ranges from three to five million people. The destructive power of the storm was not in power. The reason for the huge death toll is that the wave swamped low-lying islands in the Ganges delta, wiping out villages.

Earthquake in Chile

The largest earthquake in history is recognized as occurring in 1960 in Chile. Its strength on the Richter scale is nine and a half points. The epicenter was in the Pacific Ocean just a hundred miles from Chile. This in turn caused a tsunami.

Several thousand people died. The cost of the destruction that occurred is estimated at more than half a billion dollars. Severe landslides occurred. Many of them changed the direction of the rivers.

Tsunami on the coast of Alaska

The strongest tsunami of the mid-twentieth century occurred off the coast of Alaska at Lituya Bay. Hundreds of millions of cubic meters of earth and ice fell from the mountain into the bay, causing a response surge on the opposite shore of the bay.

The resulting half-kilometer wave, soaring into the air, plunged back into the sea. This tsunami is the highest in the world. Only two people became its victims only due to the fact that there were no human settlements in the Lituya area.

The most terrible event of the 20th century

The most terrible event of the last century can be called the bombing of Japanese cities - Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This tragedy occurred on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively. After the explosions of atomic bombs, these cities were almost completely turned into ruins.

The use of nuclear weapons showed the whole world how colossal their consequences could be. The bombing of Japanese cities was the first use of nuclear weapons against humans.

The most terrible explosion in the history of mankind, according to the site, was also the work of Americans. "The Big One" was blown up during the Cold War.
Subscribe to our channel in Yandex.Zen

World War I

The birth of fascism. The world on the eve of World War II

The Second World War

The world wars of the 20th century brought us to the brink of death world civilization, were a difficult test for humanity, the humanistic values ​​​​developed throughout its entire previous history. At the same time, they were a reflection of the fundamental changes that had taken place in the world, one of the terrible consequences of the very process of development of civilization.

causes of world wars

Since wars in our century have acquired a global scale, it is more logical to start with an analysis of the causes that are global in nature, and first of all with the characteristics of the state Western civilization, the values ​​of which have dominated and continue to play the same role in the modern world, determining the general direction of human development.

By the beginning of our century, the crisis phenomena that accompanied the industrial stage of development of the West throughout the 19th century resulted in a global crisis, which actually lasted throughout the first half of the 20th century. The material basis of the crisis was the rapid development of market relations on the basis of industrial production and technological progress in general, which, on the one hand, allowed Western society to make a sharp leap forward compared to other countries, and on the other, gave rise to phenomena that threatened Western civilization with degeneration. Indeed, the filling of markets with goods and services more and more fully satisfied the needs of people, but the price for this was the transformation of the overwhelming mass of workers into an appendage of machines and mechanisms, conveyors, technological process, increasingly gave work a collective character, etc. This led to the depersonalization of man, which was clearly manifested in the emergence of the phenomenon mass consciousness, which supplanted individualism and personal interests of people, i.e. values ​​on the basis of which humanistic Western civilization actually arose and developed.

As industrial progress developed, humanistic values ​​increasingly gave way to corporate, technocratic, and finally totalitarian consciousness with all its known attributes. This trend clearly manifested itself not only in the spiritual sphere in the form of a reorientation of people towards new values, but contributed to an unprecedented strengthening of the role of the state, which turned into the bearer of a national idea, replacing the ideas of democracy.

This most general characteristic of the historical and psychological changes underlying the phenomenon of world wars we are considering can be a kind of background when considering their geohistoric, socio-economic, demographic, military-political and other reasons.

The First World War, which began in 1914, affected 38 countries in Europe, Asia and Africa. It was carried out over a vast territory, which amounted to 4 million square meters. km and involved more than 1.5 billion people, i.e. more than 3/4 of the world's population.

The reason for the war was the tragic shot in Sarajevo, but its true causes were rooted in complex contradictions between the participating countries.

Above we talked about the growing global crisis of civilization as a result of industrial progress. By the beginning of the 20th century. the logic of socio-economic development led to the establishment of a monopolistic regime in the economies of industrialized countries, which affected the internal political climate of countries (the growth of totalitarian tendencies, the growth of militarization), as well as world relations (increased struggle between countries for markets, for political influence). The basis of these trends was the policy of monopolies with their exclusively expansionist, aggressive nature. At the same time, monopolies merged with the state, the formation state monopoly capitalism, what gave public policy increasingly expansionist

character. This was, in particular, evidenced by: the widespread growth of militarization, the emergence of military-political alliances, the increasing frequency of military conflicts, which until then were of a local nature, the strengthening of colonial oppression, etc. The aggravation of rivalry between countries was also determined to a large extent by the relative unevenness of their socio-economic development, which influenced the degree and forms of their external expansion.

15.1. First World War

The situation on the eve of the war

At the beginning of the 20th century. blocs of countries participating in the First World War took place. On the one hand, these were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, which formed into Triple Alliance(1882), and on the other - England, France and Russia, who created Entente(1904-1907). The leading role in the Austro-German and Romano-British blocs was played by Germany and England, respectively. The conflict between these two states lay at the heart of the future world war. At the same time, Germany sought to win a worthy place in the sun, England defended the existing world hierarchy.

At the beginning of the century, Germany took second place in the world in terms of industrial production(after the USA) and first place in Europe (in 1913, Germany smelted 16.8 million tons of cast iron, 15.7 million tons of steel;

England, respectively - 10.4 million tons and 9 million tons (for comparison, France - 5.2 million and 4.7 million tons, respectively, and Russia - 4.6 million tons and 4.9 million tons) . Other areas developed at a fairly rapid pace national economy Germany, science, education, etc.

At the same time, Germany's geopolitical position did not correspond to the growing power of its monopolies and the ambitions of the strengthening state. In particular, colonial possessions Germany was very modest in comparison with other industrial countries. Out of 65 million sq. km of the total colonial possessions of England, France, Russia, Germany, the USA and Japan, in which 526 million natives lived, Germany accounted for 2.9 million square meters at the beginning of the First World War. km (or 3.5%) with a population of 12.3 million people (or 2.3%). It should be borne in mind that the population of Germany itself was the largest of all countries Western Europe.

Already at the beginning of the 20th century. Germany's expansion in the Middle East is intensifying due to the construction of the Baghdad Railway; in China - in connection with the annexation of the port of Jiaozhou (1897) and the establishment of its protectorate over the Shandong Peninsula. Germany also establishes a protectorate over Samoa, the Caroline and Mariana Islands in the Pacific Ocean, and acquires the colonies of Togo and Cameroon in East Africa. This gradually aggravated Anglo-German, German-French and German-Russian contradictions. In addition, German-French relations were complicated by the problem of Alsace, Lorraine and the Ruhr; German-Russian - by Germany's intervention in the Balkan issue, its support there for the policies of Austria-Hungary and Turkey. German-American trade relations in the field of exports of mechanical engineering products in Latin America, Southeast Asia and the Middle East also worsened (at the beginning of the century, Germany exported 29.1% of world exports of machinery, while the US share was 26.8%. Harbingers The First World War was the Moroccan crises (1905, 1911), the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), the Italian seizure of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, the Italo-Turkish War (1911-1912), the Balkan Wars (1912-1913 and 1913).

On the eve of the First World War, the propaganda of militarism and chauvinism sharply intensified in almost all countries. She lay down on the fertilized soil. Developed industrial states, which have achieved tangible superiority in economic development in comparison with other peoples, began to feel their racial and national superiority, the ideas of which began to emerge from the middle of the 19th century. were cultivated by individual politicians, and by the beginning of the 20th century. become an essential component of the official state ideology. Thus, the Pan-German Union, created in 1891, openly declared England to be the main enemy of the peoples included in it, calling for the seizure of the territories belonging to it, as well as Russia, France, Belgium, and Holland. The ideological basis for this was the concept of the superiority of the German nation. In Italy there was propaganda for expanding dominance in the Mediterranean; In Turkey, the ideas of pan-Turkism were cultivated, pointing to the main enemy - Russia and pan-Slavism. At the other pole, the preaching of colonialism flourished in England, the cult of the army in France, and the doctrine of the protection of all Slavs and pan-Slavism under the auspices of the empire in Russia.

Preparing for war

At the same time, military-economic preparations for world slaughter were underway. So, since the 90s. by 1913, the military budgets of leading countries grew by more than 80%. Rapidly developed military defense industry: in Germany it employed 115 thousand workers, in Austria-Hungary - 40 thousand, in France - 100 thousand, in England - 100 thousand, in Russia - 80 thousand people. By the beginning of the war, military production in Germany and Austria-Hungary was only slightly inferior to similar indicators in the Entente countries. However, the Entente received a clear advantage in the event of a protracted war or expansion of its coalition.

Taking into account the latter circumstance, German strategists have long been developing a blitzkrieg plan (A. Schliefen(1839-1913), X Moltke (1848-1916), 3. Schlichging, F. Bernardi and etc.). German plan provided for a lightning-fast victorious strike in the West with simultaneous deterrent, defensive battles on the eastern front, with the subsequent defeat of Russia; The Austro-Hungarian headquarters planned a war on two fronts (against Russia and in the Balkans). The plans of the opposing side included an offensive by the Russian army in two directions at once (northwest - against Germany and southwest - against Austria-Hungary) with a force of 800 thousand bayonets using passive wait-and-see tactics French troops. German politicians and military strategists pinned their hopes on England’s neutrality at the beginning of the war, for which purpose in the summer of 1914 they pushed Austria-Hungary into a conflict with Serbia.

Beginning of the war

In response to the assassination of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke, on June 28, 1914 Franz Ferdinand In Sarajevo, Austria-Hungary immediately opened military operations against Serbia, in support of which on July 31, Nicholas II announced general mobilization in Russia. Russia refused Germany's demand to stop mobilization. On August 1, 1914, Germany declared war on Russia, and on August 3, on France. Germany's hopes for the neutrality of England did not materialize; it issued an ultimatum in defense of Belgium, after which it began military operations against Germany at sea, officially declaring war on it on August 4.

At the beginning of the war, many states declared neutrality, including Holland, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Romania, the USA, and Sweden.

Military operations in 1915-1918.

Military operations in 1914 on the Western European Front were offensive from Germany, whose troops, having passed Belgium from the north, entered French territory. At the beginning of September, a grandiose battle took place between the cities of Verdun and Paris (about 2 million people took part), which was lost " by German troops. The Russian army was advancing in the Eastern European direction: troops of the Northwestern and Western fronts (under the command of General Raninkampff and the general Samsonova) were stopped by the Germans; The troops of the Southwestern Front achieved success by occupying the city of Lvov. At the same time, hostilities unfolded on the Caucasian and Balkan fronts. In general, the Entente managed to thwart the blitzkrieg plans, as a result of which the war acquired a protracted, positional character, and the scales began to tip in its direction.

In 1915, there were no major changes on the Western European Front. Russia as a whole lost the 1915 campaign, surrendering Lviv to the Austrians, and Liepaja, Warsaw, and Novogeorgievsk to the Germans.

Contrary to pre-war obligations, in 1915 Italy declared war on Austria-Hungary, as a result of which a new Italian front opened, where military operations did not reveal a clear advantage of the parties. This advantage in favor of the Entente in southern Europe was neutralized by the registration in September 1915. Fourth Ausgro-German-Bulgaro-Turkish Union. One of the results of its formation was the defeat of Serbia with the subsequent evacuation of its army (120 thousand people) to the island of Corfu.

In the same year, actions on the Caucasian front were transferred to the territory of Iran with the participation of not only Russia and Turkey, but also England; After the landing of the Anglo-French troops in Thessaloniki, the Thessaloniki Front took shape, and the British occupied the territory of South-West Africa. The most significant naval battle of 1915 was the battle for the capture of the Bosporus and Dardanelles.

1916 on the Western European Front was marked by two major battles: under the city Verdun and on the river Somme, where 1 million 300 thousand people were killed, wounded and captured on both sides. This year, the Russian army carried out offensive operations on the Northwestern and Western fronts in support of the Allies during the Battle of Verdun. In addition, on Southwestern Front a breakthrough was made that went down in history

Military operations on the Eastern and Western Fronts (1914-1918)gg.)

Military operations on the Eastern Front in 1914-1917.

Military operations on the Western Front in 1914

named after the general A, Brusilova(1853-1926), as a result of which 409 thousand Austrian soldiers and officers were captured and an area of ​​25 thousand square meters was occupied. km.

In the Caucasus, units of the Russian army occupied the cities of Erzurum, Trebizond, Ruvanduz, Mush, and Bitlis. England was victorious in the North Sea in the largest naval battle of the First World War (Battle of Jutland).

IN In general, the successes of the Entente provided a turning point in the course of military operations. German command (generals Ludendorff(1865-1937) and Hindenburg) From the end of 1916 it switched to defense on all fronts.

However, already in next year Russian troops left Riga. The weakened positions of the Entente were strengthened by the entry into the war on its side of the United States, China, Greece, Brazil, Cuba, Panama, Liberia and Siam. On the Western Front, the Entente failed to gain a decisive advantage, while on the new Iranian front the British occupied Baghdad, and in Africa they consolidated victory in Togo and Cameroon.

In 1918, a unified allied command of the Entente countries was created. Despite the absence of the Russian Front, the Germans and Austrians still kept up to 75 divisions in Russia, playing a difficult game in the prevailing conditions after the October Revolution. The German command launched a major offensive on the river. Somme, which ended in failure. The Allied counteroffensive forced the German General base request a truce. It was signed on November 11, 1918 in Compiegne, and on January 18, 1919. A conference of 27 allied countries opened at the Palace of Versailles, which determined the nature of the peace treaty with Germany. The treaty was signed on June 28, 1919; Soviet Russia, which concluded a separate peace with Germany in March 1918, did not participate in the development of the Versailles system.

Results of the war

By Treaty of Versailles The territory of Germany decreased by 70 thousand square meters. km, it lost all its few colonies; the military articles obliged Germany not to introduce conscription, to dissolve all military organizations, not to have modern types of weapons, and to pay reparations. The map of Europe was completely redrawn. With the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian dualist monarchy, the statehood of Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia was formalized, and the independence and borders of Albania, Bulgaria, and Romania were confirmed. Belgium, Denmark, Poland, France and Czechoslovakia regained the lands seized by Germany, receiving part of the original German territories under their control. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine were separated from Turkey and transferred as mandated territories to England and France. The new western border of Soviet Russia was also determined at the Paris Peace Conference (Curzon Line), while the statehood of parts of the former empire was consolidated:

Consequences of the First World War

Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Finland and Estonia. The First World War demonstrated crisis state civilization. Indeed, in all the warring countries, democracy was curtailed, the sphere of market relations was narrowed, giving way to tough government regulation spheres of production and distribution in its extreme statist form. These trends contradicted the economic foundations of Western civilization.

No less striking evidence of the deep crisis was the dramatic political changes in a number of countries. Thus, following the October Revolution in Russia, revolutions of a socialist nature took place in Finland, Germany, and Hungary; in other countries there was an unprecedented rise in the revolutionary movement, and in the colonies - in the anti-colonial movement. This seemed to confirm the prediction of the founders of communist theory about the inevitable death of capitalism, which was also evidenced by the emergence of the Communist 3rd International, the arrival the Socialist International, the coming to power of socialist parties in many countries and, finally, the lasting conquest of power in Russia by the Bolshevik Party.

The First World War was a catalyst for industrial development. During the war years, 28 million rifles, about 1 million machine guns, 150 thousand guns, 9,200 tanks, thousands of aircraft were produced, a submarine fleet was created (more than 450 submarines were built in Germany alone over these years). Military orientation industrial progress became obvious, the next step was the creation of equipment and technologies for the mass destruction of people. However, already during the First World War, monstrous experiments were carried out, for example, the first use of chemical weapons by the Germans in 1915 in Belgium near Ypres.

1 Statism - active participation of the state in economic life society, mainly using direct intervention methods.

The consequences of the war were catastrophic for the national economies of most countries. They resulted in widespread long-term economic crises, which were based on the gigantic economic imbalances that arose during the war years. Direct military expenditures of the warring countries alone amounted to $208 billion. Against the background of a widespread decline in civilian production and living standards of the population, monopolies associated with military production were strengthened and enriched. Thus, by the beginning of 1918, the German monopolists had accumulated 10 billion gold marks as profits, the American ones - 35 billion gold dollars, etc. Having strengthened during the war years, the monopolies increasingly began to determine the paths of further development, leading to the disaster of Western civilization . This thesis is confirmed by the emergence and spread of fascism.

15.2. The birth of fascism. The world on the eve of World War II

Fascism was a reflection and result of the development of the main contradictions of Western civilization. His ideology absorbed (to the point of grotesquery) the ideas of racism and social equality, technocratic and statist concepts. Eclectic Weave different ideas and theories resulted in the form of accessible populist doctrine and demagogic politics. National Socialist workers' party Germany grew out of the "Free Workers' Committee for the Achievement of a Good World" - a circle founded in 1915 by workers Anton Drexler. At the beginning of 1919, other National Socialist organizations were created in Germany. In November 1921 it was created fascist party in Italy, with 300 thousand members, of which 40% are workers. Recognizing this political force, the King of Italy instructed the leader of this party in 1922 Benito Mussolini(1883-1945) form a cabinet of ministers, which from 1925 becomes fascist.

According to the same scenario, the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933. Party leader Adolf Gitler(1889-1945) receives the position of Reich Chancellor from the hands of the President of Germany Paul von Hindenburg (1847-1934).

From the first steps, the fascists established themselves as irreconcilable anti-communists, anti-Semites, good organizers capable of reaching all segments of the population, and revanchists. Their activities could hardly have been so rapidly successful without the support of the revanchist monopolistic circles of their countries. The existence of their direct connections with the fascists is beyond doubt, if only because the leaders of the criminal regime and the largest economic magnates of fascist Germany (G. Schacht, G. Krupp) were nearby in the dock at Nuremberg in 1945. It can be argued that financial resources monopolies contributed to the fascisation of countries, the strengthening of fascism, designed not only to destroy the communist regime in the USSR (anti-communist idea), inferior peoples (the idea of ​​racism), but also to redraw the map of the world, destroying the Versailles system of the post-war system (revanchist idea).

the phenomenon of fascisation in a number of European countries even more clearly demonstrated the critical state of the entire Western civilization. Essentially, this political and ideological movement represented an alternative to its foundations by curtailing democracy, market relations and replacing them with the politics of statism, building a society of social equality for selected peoples, cultivating collectivist forms of life, inhumane attitude towards non-Aryans, etc. True, fascism did not imply complete destruction of Western civilization. Perhaps this to some extent explains the relatively loyal attitude of the ruling circles for a long time democratic countries to this formidable phenomenon. In addition, fascism can be classified as one of the varieties of totalitarianism. Western political scientists have proposed a definition of totalitarianism based on several criteria, which have received recognition and further development in political science. Totalitarianism characterized by: 1) the presence official ideology, covering the most vital spheres of human life and society and supported by the overwhelming majority of citizens. This ideology is based on rejection of the previously existing order and pursues the task of uniting society to create a new way of life, not excluding the use of violent methods; 2) the dominance of a mass party, built on a strictly hierarchical principle of management, usually with a leader at its head. Party - performing the functions of control over the bureaucratic state apparatus or dissolving in it; 3) availability developed system police control permeating all public aspects of the country's life; 4) almost complete party control over the media; 5) complete control of the party over the security forces, primarily the army; 6) the leadership of the central government in the economic life of the country.

A similar characteristic of totalitarianism is applicable both to the regime that developed in Germany, Italy and other fascist countries, and in many ways to the Stalinist regime that developed in the 30s in the USSR. It is also possible that such similarity in the various faces of totalitarianism made it difficult for politicians who were at the head of democratic countries to understand the danger posed by this monstrous phenomenon in that dramatic period of modern history.

Already in 1935, Germany refused to implement the military articles of the Versailles Treaty, which was followed by the occupation of the Rhineland demilitarized zone, withdrawal from the League of Nations, Italian assistance in the occupation of Ethiopia (1935-1936), intervention in Spain (1936-1939), the Anschluss (or annexation) of Austria (1938), dismemberment of Czechoslovakia (1938-1939) in accordance with Munich Agreement etc. Finally, in April 1939, Germany unilaterally terminated the Anglo-German naval agreement and the non-aggression pact with Poland, and thus the casus belli (cause for war) arose.

15.3. The Second World War

Foreign policies of countries before the war

The Versailles system finally fell with the outbreak of World War II, for which Germany was quite thoroughly prepared. Thus, from 1934 to 1939, military production in the country increased 22 times, the number of troops - 35 times, Germany took second place in the world in terms of industrial production, etc.

Currently, researchers do not have a common view on the geopolitical state of the world on the eve of World War II. Some historians (Marxists) continue to insist on two polis characteristics. In their opinion, there were two social political systems(socialism and capitalism), and within the framework of the capitalist system of world relations - two centers future war(Germany - in Europe and Japan - in Asia). A significant part of historians believe that on the eve of World War II there were three political systems: bourgeois-democratic, socialist and fascist-militarist. The interaction of these systems, the balance of power between them could ensure peace or disrupt it. A possible bloc of bourgeois-democratic and socialist systems was a real alternative to World War II. However, the peace alliance did not work out. “The bourgeois-democratic countries did not agree to create a bloc before the start of the war, because their leadership continued to view Soviet totalitarianism as the greatest threat to the foundations of civilization (the result of revolutionary changes in the USSR, including the 30s) than its fascist antipode, which openly proclaimed a crusade against communism. The USSR's attempt to create a system collective security in Europe ended with the signing of treaties with France and Czechoslovakia (1935). But these treaties were not put into effect during the period of Germany’s occupation of Czechoslovakia due to the counteracting “policy of appeasement” pursued at that time by most European countries towards Germany.

Germany in October 1936 issued military-political union with Italy ("Axis Berlin - Rome"), and a month later between Japan and Germany was signed Anti-Comintern Pact, which Italy joined a year later (November 6, 1937). The creation of a revanchist alliance forced the countries of the bourgeois-democratic camp to become more active. However, only in March 1939 did England and France begin negotiations with the USSR on joint actions against Germany. But the agreement was never signed. Despite the polarity of interpretations of the reasons for the failed union of anti-fascist states, some of which shift the blame for the unbridled aggressor onto capitalist countries, others attribute it to the policies of the leadership of the USSR, etc., one thing is obvious - the skillful use by fascist politicians of contradictions between anti-fascist countries, which led to grave consequences for the whole world.

USSR politics on the eve of the war

The consolidation of the fascist camp against the backdrop of a policy of appeasement of the aggressor pushed the USSR into an open fight against the spreading aggressor: 1936 - Spain, 1938 small war with Japan at Lake Khasan, 1939 - Soviet-Japanese war at Khalkin-Gol. However, quite unexpectedly, on August 23, 1939 (eight days before the outbreak of World War II, the Non-Aggression Pact between Germany and the USSR (called the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) was signed. The secret protocols to this pact on delimiting the spheres of influence of Germany and the USSR in the north became known to the world community and southern Europe, as well as the partition of Poland, forced us to take a fresh look (especially domestic researchers) on the role of the USSR in the anti-fascist struggle on the eve of the war, as well as its activities from September 1939 to June 1941, on the history of the opening of the second front and much more.

There is no doubt that the signing of the Soviet-German non-aggression pact dramatically changed the balance of forces in Europe:

The USSR avoided a seemingly inevitable collision with Germany, while the countries of Western Europe found themselves face to face with the aggressor, whom they continued to pacify by inertia (an attempt by England and France from August 23 to September 1, 1939 to negotiate with Germany in Polish question similar to the Munich Agreement).

Beginning of World War II

The immediate pretext for the attack on Poland was a fairly open provocation of Germany on their common border (Gliwice), after which on September 1, 1939, 57 German divisions (1.5 million people), about 2,500 tanks, 2,000 aircraft invaded the territory Poland. The Second World War began.

England and France declared war on Germany on September 3, without, however, real help Poland. From September 3 to 10, Australia, New Zealand, India, and Canada entered the war against Germany; The United States declared neutrality, Japan declared non-intervention in the European War.

Thus, World War II began as a war between the bourgeois-democratic and fascist-militarist blocs. The first stage of the war dates from September 1, 1939 - June 21, 1941, at the beginning of which german army before

First stage of the war

On September 17, it occupied part of Poland, reaching the line (the cities of Lvov, Vladimir-Volynsky, Brest-Litovsk), designated by one of the mentioned secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Until May 10, 1940, England and France conducted virtually no military operations with the enemy, so this period was called the “Phantom War.” Germany took advantage of the passivity of the Allies, expanding its aggression, occupying Denmark and Norway in April 1940 and going on the offensive from the shores of the North Sea to the Maginot Line on May 10 of the same year. During May, the governments of Luxembourg, Belgium, and Holland capitulated. And already on June 22, 1940, France was forced to sign an armistice with Germany in Compiegne. As a result of the actual surrender of France, a collaborationist state was created in its south, led by Marshal A. Pétain(1856-1951) and the administrative center in Vichy (the so-called “Vichy regime”). France's resistance was led by a general Charles de Gaulle ( 1890-1970).

On May 10, changes occurred in the leadership of Great Britain; Winston Churchill(1874-1965), whose anti-German, anti-fascist and, of course, anti-Soviet sentiments were well known. The period of the "strange warrior" is over.

From August 1940 to May 1941 German command organized systematic air raids on the cities of England, trying to force its leadership to withdraw from the war. As a result, during this time, about 190 thousand high-explosive and incendiary bombs were dropped on England, and by June 1941, a third of its tonnage was sunk at sea merchant fleet. Germany intensified its pressure on the countries of South- of Eastern Europe. The accession of the Bulgarian pro-fascist government to the Berlin Pact (an agreement between Germany, Italy and Japan of September 27, 1940) ensured the success of the aggression against Greece and Yugoslavia in April 1941.

Italy in 1940 developed military operations in Africa, attacking the colonial possessions of England and France (East Africa, Sudan, Somalia, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia). However, in December 1940 the British forced Italian troops to surrender. Germany rushed to the aid of its ally.

The policy of the USSR at the first stage of the war did not receive a single assessment. A significant part of Russian and foreign researchers are inclined to interpret it as complicit in relation to Germany, which is supported by the agreement between the USSR and Germany within the framework of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, as well as fairly close military-political and trade cooperation between the two countries until the start of German aggression against the USSR. In our opinion, in such an assessment, a more strategic approach at the pan-European, global level prevails. At the same time, a point of view that draws attention to the benefits received by the USSR from cooperation with Germany at the first stage of World War II somewhat corrects this unambiguous assessment, allowing us to talk about a certain strengthening of the USSR within the framework of the time it gained to prepare to repel the inevitable aggression, which ultimately provided subsequent Great victory over the fascism of the entire anti-fascist camp.

In this chapter we will limit ourselves to only this preliminary assessment participation of the USSR in the Second World War, since its remaining stages are discussed in more detail in Chapter. 16. Here it is advisable to dwell only on some of the most important episodes of the subsequent stages.

The second stage of the war (June 22, 1941 - November 1942) was characterized by the entry of the USSR into the war, the retreat of the Red Army and its first victory (the battle for Moscow), as well as the beginning of the intensive formation of the anti-Hitler coalition. Thus, on June 22, 1941, England declared full support for the USSR, and the United States almost simultaneously (June 23) expressed its readiness to provide it economic assistance. As a result, on July 12, a Soviet-British agreement on joint actions against Germany was signed in Moscow, and on August 16, trade turnover between the two countries was signed. In the same month, as a result of the meeting of F. Roosevelt(1882-1945) and W. Churchill was signed Atlantic Charter, to which the USSR joined in September. However, the United States entered the war on December 7, 1941 after the tragedy at the Pacific Naval Base Pearl Harbor. Developing an offensive from December 1941 to June 1942, Japan occupied Thailand, Singapore, Burma, Indonesia, New Guinea, Philippines. On January 1, 1942, in Washington, 27 states that were at war with the countries of the so-called “fascist axis” signed the United Nations Declaration, which completed the difficult process of creating an anti-Hitler coalition.

Second stage of the war

The Second World War. Military operations from 1.1X 1939 to 22.VI. 1941

Third stage of the war

The third stage of the war (mid-November 1942 - end of 1943) was marked by a radical change in its course, which meant the loss of strategic initiative by the countries of the fascist coalition at the fronts, the superiority of the anti-Hitler coalition in the economic, political and moral aspects. On the Eastern Front the Soviet Army won biggest victories near Stalingrad and Kursk. English American troops successfully attacked in Africa, liberating Egypt, Cyrenaica, and Tunisia from German-Italian forces. In Europe as a result successful actions In Sicily, the Allies forced Italy to capitulate. In 1943, the allied relations of the countries of the anti-fascist bloc strengthened: at the Moscow Conference (October 1943), England, the USSR and the USA adopted declarations on Italy, Austria and universal security (also signed by China), on the responsibility of the Nazis for the crimes committed.

On Tehran Conference(November 28 - December 1, 1943), where f. met for the first time. Roosevelt, I. Stalin and W. Churchill, it was decided to open a Second Front in Europe in May 1944 and the Declaration on joint actions in the war against Germany and post-war cooperation was adopted. At the end of 1943, at a conference of leaders of England, China and the United States, the Japanese issue was resolved in a similar way.

Fourth stage

At the fourth stage of the war (from the end of 1943 to May 9, 1945) there was active process liberation by the Soviet Army of the western regions of the USSR, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, etc. In Western Europe, with some delay (June 6, 1944), the Second Front was opened, the liberation of the countries of Western Europe was underway. In 1945, 18 million people, about 260 thousand guns and mortars, up to 40 thousand tanks and self-propelled artillery units, and over 38 thousand aircraft simultaneously participated on the battlefields in Europe.

On Yalta Conference(February 1945) the leaders of England, the USSR and the USA decided the fate of Germany, Poland, Yugoslavia, discussed the issue of creating United Nations(established on April 25, 1945), concluded an agreement on the USSR's entry into the war against Japan.

The result of joint efforts was the complete and unconditional surrender of Germany on May 8, 1945, signed in the Berlin suburb of Karl-Horst.

Fifth stage of the war

The final, fifth stage of the Second World War took place in the Far East and Southeast Asia (from May 9 to September 2, 1945). By the summer of 1945, allied troops and forces of national resistance liberated all the lands captured by Japan, and American troops occupied the strategically important islands of Irojima and Okinawa, carrying out massive bombing attacks on cities island state. For the first time in world practice, the Americans carried out two barbaric atomic bombings of the cities of Hiroshima (August 6, 1945) and Nagasaki (August 9, 1945).

After the lightning defeat of the USSR Kwantung Army (August 1945), Japan signed an act of surrender (September 2, 1945).

Results of World War II

The Second World War, planned by the aggressors as a series of small lightning wars, turned into a global armed conflict. At its various stages, from 8 to 12.8 million people, from 84 to 163 thousand guns, from 6.5 to 18.8 thousand aircraft simultaneously participated on both sides. The total theater of military operations was 5.5 times larger than the territories covered by the First World War. In total, during the war of 1939-1945. 64 states with a total population of 1.7 billion people were involved. The losses suffered as a result of the war are striking in their scale. More than 50 million people died, and if we take into account the constantly updated data on the losses of the USSR (they range from 21.78 million to about 30 million), this figure cannot be called final. 11 million lives were destroyed in the death camps alone. The economies of most of the countries at war were undermined.

It was these terrible results of the Second World War, which brought civilization to the brink of destruction, that forced its vital forces to become more active. This is evidenced, in particular, by the fact of the formation of an effective structure of the world community - the United Nations (UN), which opposes totalitarian trends in development and the imperial ambitions of individual states; the act of the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, which condemned fascism, totalitarianism, and punished the leaders of criminal regimes; a broad anti-war movement that contributed to the adoption of international treaties banning the production, distribution and use of weapons mass destruction etc.

By the time the war began, only England, Canada and the United States remained, perhaps, centers of reservation for the foundations of Western civilization. The rest of the world was increasingly sliding into the abyss of totalitarianism, which, as we tried to show by analyzing the causes and consequences of world wars, led to the inevitable destruction of humanity. The victory over fascism strengthened the position of democracy and provided the path to the slow recovery of civilization. However, this path was very difficult and lengthy. Suffice it to say that only from the end of the Second World War until 1982, there were 255 wars and military conflicts, until recently the destructive confrontation between political camps, the so-called “Cold War,” lasted, humanity more than once stood on the brink of the possibility of nuclear war, etc. etc. Even today we can see in the world the same military conflicts, bloc feuds, remaining islands of totalitarian regimes, etc. However, as it seems to us, they no longer determine the face of modern civilization.

Self-test questions

What were the causes of the First World War? What stages are distinguished during the First World War, what groupings of countries participated in it? How did the First World War end, what consequences did it have?

Reveal the reasons for the emergence and spread of fascism in the 20th century, characterize it, and compare it with totalitarianism. What caused the Second World War, what was the alignment of the countries participating in it, what stages did it go through and how did it end? Compare the size of human and material losses in the First and Second World Wars.

20th century

1. War with the Japanese Empire of 1904-1905.

2. First World War 1914-1918.

Defeat, change in the political system, the beginning of the civil war, territorial losses, about 2 million 200 thousand people died or went missing. The population loss was approximately 5 million people. Russia's material losses amounted to approximately 100 billion US dollars in 1918 prices.

3. Civil war 1918-1922.

The establishment of the Soviet system, the return of part of the lost territories, the Red Army died and went missing, according to approximate data from 240 to 500 thousand people, in the White Army at least 175 thousand people died and went missing, total losses with the civilian population for the years of the civil war amounted to about 2.5 million people. The population loss was approximately 4 million people. Material losses are estimated at approximately 25-30 billion US dollars in 1920 prices.

4. Soviet-Polish War 1919-1921.

According to Russian researchers, about 100 thousand people died or went missing.

5. Military conflict between the USSR and the Japanese Empire in the Far East and participation in the Japanese-Mongolian War of 1938-1939.

About 15 thousand people died or went missing.

6. Soviet-Finnish war of 1939-1940.

Territorial acquisitions, about 85 thousand people died or went missing.

7. In 1923-1941, the USSR participated in the civil war in China and in the war between China and the Japanese Empire. And in 1936-1939 in the Spanish Civil War.

About 500 people died or went missing.

8. USSR occupation of the territories of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia in 1939 under the terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty (Pact) with Nazi Germany on non-aggression and division of Eastern Europe of August 23, 1939.

Irreversible losses of the Red Army in Western Ukraine and Western Belarus amounted to about 1,500 people. There are no data on losses in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

9. Second World (Great Patriotic) War.

Territorial acquisitions in East Prussia (Kaliningrad region) and in the Far East as a result of the war with the Japanese Empire (part of Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands), the total irretrievable losses in the army and among the civilian population ranged from 20 million to 26 million people. Material losses of the USSR amounted, according to various estimates, from 2 to 3 trillion US dollars in 1945 prices.

10. Civil war in China 1946-1945.

About 1,000 people from among military and civilian specialists, officers, sergeants and privates died from wounds and illnesses.

11. Korean Civil War 1950-1953.

About 300 military personnel, mostly officer-pilots, were killed or died from wounds and illnesses.

12. During the participation of the USSR in the Vietnam War of 1962-1974, in military conflicts of the second half of the 20th century in Africa and the countries of Central and South America, in the Arab-Israeli wars from 1967 to 1974, in the suppression of the 1956 uprising in Hungary and 1968 in Czechoslovakia, as well as in border conflicts with the PRC, about 3,000 people died. from among military and civilian specialists, officers, sergeants and privates.

13. War in Afghanistan 1979-1989.

About 15,000 people died, died from wounds and illnesses, or went missing. from among military and civilian specialists, officers, sergeants and privates. The total costs of the USSR for the war in Afghanistan are estimated at approximately 70-100 billion US dollars in 1990 prices. Main result: Change of political system and collapse of the USSR with the secession of 14 union republics.

Results:

During the 20th century, the Russian Empire and the USSR took part in 5 big wars on its territory, of which the First World War, the Civil War and the Second world war can be safely classified as mega-large.

The total number of losses of the Russian Empire and the USSR in wars and armed conflicts over the 20th century, it is estimated to be approximately 30 to 35 million people, taking into account civilian losses from famine and epidemics caused by the war.

The total cost of material losses of the Russian Empire and the USSR is estimated at approximately 8 to 10 trillion US dollars in 2000 prices.

14. War in Chechnya 1994-2000.

Official exact numbers There are no combat and civilian casualties killed, died from wounds and illnesses, or missing persons on both sides. The total combat losses on the Russian side are estimated at approximate figures of 10 thousand people. According to experts, up to 20-25 thousand. According to estimates of the Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers. The total combat irretrievable losses of the Chechen rebels are estimated at figures ranging from 10 to 15 thousand people. Irreversible losses of the civilian population of the Chechen and Russian-speaking population, including ethnic cleansing among the Russian-speaking population, are estimated at approximate figures from 1000 according to official Russian data to 50 thousand people according to unofficial data from human rights organizations. The exact material losses are unknown, but rough estimates suggest total losses of at least $20 billion in 2000 prices.