Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Politics and Geopolitics / On the national idea / Articles
The Soviet system stood the test of time for durability
Material posted: Publication date: 08-05-2012

Essence developed liberal-bourgeois circles — both homegrown and foreign — falsification of Russian history is to replace our common past, a biography of the people, and with it — and the biographies of millions of compatriots who devoted their lives to the revival and prosperity of our Motherland, the struggle for its freedom from foreign domination. Falsification of history is a brazen attempt to substitute Russia itself. One of the main objects of anti-Soviet falsifications, the history chose heroic feat of Soviet people, who liberated the world from German fascism.

It is clear that genuine patriots do not accept this game thimblerigger. Therefore, readers of "Truth" warmly endorsed published by the newspaper on the eve of the 70th anniversary of the beginning of the great Patriotic war the article war veteran, doctor of Philology, honorary Professor of Tver state University Alexander Ogneva and strongly recommended the newspaper to continue publication of his revelations falsification of history. Fulfilling the wishes of the readers, the editorial Board of "Pravda" has decided to publish the research head of honored scientist of the Russian Federation A.V. Ogneva in Friday issues of the newspaper.

The Defeat Of Japan

The Soviet Union has made a significant contribution to the defeat of militaristic Japan. In December 1941, Roosevelt expressed a wish to our government on the military intervention of the USSR against Japan. June 17, 1942, he again urged him to start joint military action against it, noting that "the Japanese government may be preparing for operations against the Soviet Primorye". It was true, but the failure of the plan "Barbarossa", our victory near Moscow and Stalingrad cooled Japanese politicians. In October 1943, Stalin told the Secretary of state Hello readiness to help the allies to beat Japan.

About this urgent need allies spoke in 1943 in Tehran. There, Stalin declared that the Soviet Union would act against Japan 6 months after the defeat of Germany. In February 1945 in Yalta, he reduced this period to 3 months. In July 1945 at the Potsdam conference Truman said that "the U.S. expect aid from the USSR". Stalin replied that the Soviet Union would be ready to join the action in mid-August.

The Minister of war USA Stimson on 2 July 1945 in a note to Truman so assess the prospect of war with Japan: "having Started the invasion, we have to... terminate him even more violent battles than those that took place in Germany. As a result we will suffer huge losses and be forced to leave Japan". It was believed that only Americans could lose 1 million soldiers. The end of the war saw American command in 1946 or even 1947.

Japanese militarists carried out the task to forge a large number of Soviet troops during the war of the USSR with Germany. German Ambassador Ott wrote to Ribbentrop: "Japan is preparing for any kind of chance against the USSR in order to join forces with Germany". May 15, 1942, Ribbentrop, noting the effectiveness of Japanese policy snares of Soviet troops in the far East, stressed that "Russia should keep troops in East Siberia in anticipation of the Russo-Japanese collision". In the Soviet Armed Forces was 5493000 people, including 1568000, that is over 28%, were in the far East and the southern borders of the USSR.

In the "History wars" says: "Japanese fanaticism once again proved that without the huge losses in Japan, defended by the persistent 2 million soldiers, not to win and not to conquer. The allies leaders... sought as quickly as possible to cause Russia to enter the war with Japan, hoping to bring an end to the war and to avoid further losses, and material resources". They would not succeed to end the war without the Soviet Union.

However, in the "History wars" made strange, no argumentively conclusion: "But the agreements in Yalta and Potsdam were misplaced and naive", for "weekly participation" of the USSR "in war by no means brought to its end". Naive to present such prominent politicians as Churchill and Roosevelt, is the need to be so narrow-minded layman that end of the road.

The Soviet Union on August 8, 1945 declared war on Japan. After this, the rulers of Japan became abundantly clear that they have not only no way to make change in the war, but it was nonsense even the simple its pull. At the meeting of the Supreme military Council on August 9, 1945 Prime Minister Suzuki said: "the Entry this morning in the war the Soviet Union finally puts us in an impossible position and makes it impossible to further continue the war." In the address "To the soldiers and sailors" of August 17, 1945 Emperor Hirohito, who was simultaneously the Supreme commander of Japan, said: "Now that the war against us became the Soviet Union, to continue the resistance... means to threaten the very basis of existence of our Empire."

As noted by A. Koshkin, the Japanese government had before it the intention "to negotiate the non-participation of the USSR in the war in exchange for voluntary assignment" of South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. These intentions remained only intentions. The Japanese government rejected the Potsdam Declaration of 26 July 1945, calling for Japan to surrender. Cat in the book "the Japanese front of Marshal Stalin. Russia and Japan: the Shadow of Tsushima-long century" (2004) noted that Stalin entered the war with Japan not only to return our country to the Russian far Eastern land. The main reason why Stalin was the fulfillment of allied obligations and desire not to allow U.S. troops to the borders of the Soviet Union, China and Korea. The present tense makes us not to forget about geopolitics. Japan is now persistently claim to the Kuril Islands.

Soviet troops under the command of Marshal A. Vasilevsky in 24 days utterly defeated the Japanese army. They lost in battles about 12,000 people, and the Japanese — 83700 killed, and prisoners — 594000 soldiers and officers and generals 148. At the completion of the defeat of the Kwantung army were found near Harbin balances laboratories special "unit 731" and "Detachment 100", which was engaged in the mass production and the means of delivery of bacteria of plague, cholera and other diseases. Available ready-to-use bacteria "would be enough, according to one of employees "Detachment 731", for the destruction of all of humanity". "Bombs, filled with plague fleas, was scheduled to reset in the districts of Chita, Khabarovsk, Blagoveshchensk and Ussuriisk".

2 September 1945 was signed the instrument of surrender of Japan. In the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR stated: "In commemoration of the victory over Japan, to establish that 3 September is the day of national celebration — VICTORY over Japan". Reminding about the aggressive actions of Japan in 1904, 1918, 1938 and 1939, Stalin in his address to the people said: "Today Japan admitted defeat and signed the act of unconditional surrender. This means that southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands will go to the Soviet Union, and from now on they will serve not as a means of isolation of the Soviet Union from the ocean and a base for Japanese attack on our far East, as a means of direct communication of the Soviet Union with the ocean and a base for the defense of our country against Japanese aggression."

In print thousands of times the question was raised about why the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Maybe it forced the Japanese to capitulate urgently? But even Churchill said: "It would be erroneous to believe that the fate of Japan was settled by the atomic bomb". American General MacArthur, who headed the allied troops in the Pacific, admitted in 1960 that "there was no military necessity to use the atomic bomb in 1945".

This was done in order to intimidate the Soviet Union, to force him to engage in a policy that is most beneficial to the United States and England. English scientist, Blackett felt that the atomic bombings were the first shots which started the cold war. The same thought was expressed by A. Wasilewski: "the Mass extermination of the population of Japanese cities was not dictated by any military necessity. Atomic bomb was for the ruling circles of the United States is not so much the act of the end of world war II, how the first step in the "cold war" against the USSR".

By extreme effort in a difficult atmosphere of the first postwar years the Soviet people under Stalin's leadership, has achieved what seemed to be an incredible military-technical breakthrough, very quickly eliminated the nuclear monopoly of the United States. As a result, were thwarted by extremely cynical plans of the U.S. aggressive circles to destroy many Soviet cities with nuclear bombs, and later laid the Foundation for strategic parity, which put an end to the illusions of our enemies be brought to its knees, the Soviet Union.


The hypocrisy of the allies

How us helped Britain and the USA during the great Patriotic war? Stalin, 18 July 1941 offered England to open a second front: "the Military situation of the Soviet Union, like the UK, it would be much improved if there would be a front against Hitler in the West (Northern France) and the North (Arctic). The front in Northern France, not only could delay the forces of Hitler from the East, but also would have made impossible the invasion of Hitler in England". But Churchill said, "the Chiefs of staff see no opportunities to do anything in such sizes that it can bring you even the smallest favor." On 3 September 1941, the Soviet government again raised the issue of having to open a second front in 1941 so that he would have forced the Germans to withdraw from the Eastern front 30-40 divisions. Again followed a categorical denial. The Soviet leadership in the autumn of 1941 suggested to the British government to throw on the Soviet-German front, several British divisions for a joint struggle against a common enemy. In doing so, we also were denied.

When our nation was bleeding when the USSR was very important for the diversion of some part of the German troops from our front, Churchill on 16 December 1941 reasoned: "At the moment, a fact of paramount importance during the war are the failure of the plans of Hitler and his losses in Russia. We can't yet tell how great the disaster to the German army and the Nazi regime. This mode is kept until now due to its success, get him easily, cheap price. Now instead of anticipated quick and easy victory he will have throughout the winter to withstand the bloody battles that will require huge amounts of weapons and fuel. Neither Britain nor the United States will not have to play any role in this matter, except that we must ensure accurate and timely dispatch promised us materials."

Ambassador in London I. Maisky reported to the Soviet leadership that Churchill December 18 has launched a number of conditions the fulfillment of which will allow you to "strike in Northern France, and even then not until 1943... essentially rejected Churchill for a second front in Northern France and only valerova his plan a pile of preconditions."

The American plan called for a landing in the autumn of 1942 the French coast of the English channel landing forces 5-6 divisions, but "only in two cases: if in Germany unexpectedly found a deep inner collapse or if the situation on the Soviet front will worsen". American President Roosevelt and chief of staff Marshall recognized the desirability of "operation overlord", but believed that only in the spring of 1943 should follow the Anglo-American invasion of Northern France by the forces of the 49 divisions.

May 21, 1942 in London by plane there arrived the people's Commissar for foreign Affairs Vyacheslav Molotov. In conversation with Churchill for nearly a week he demanded a speedy opening of a second front in 1942, it was diverted from the Soviet front at least 40 German divisions. Churchill proved unable to do it: no de of a sufficient number of aircraft, landing craft. Need de to prepare for the invasion of Germany in 1943.

Molotov went to Washington. From 29 may for 5 days, he had talks with Roosevelt, as a result it was agreed communiqué. In it there is a phrase: "In the negotiations was reached a full agreement on the urgent tasks of creating a second front in 1942"

On the way back Molotov again stayed in London and continued to negotiate with Churchill, who agreed to enter in the Anglo-Soviet communiqué on the second front, contained in the U.S.-Soviet communiqué. On the words agreed, but when leaving Churchill gave Molotov a Memorandum in which, on the one hand, said: "We are making preparations for the landing on the continent in August or September 1942". On the other hand, the paper noted that it is difficult "to say in advance, will be whether this operation is enabled when the date of implementation. Therefore, we cannot make promises in this business". It became clear that in 1942 the second front will not.

June 12, Churchill arrived in Washington, Roosevelt was handed a Memorandum, which stated that the British Cabinet was not in favour of the operation "overlord" in 1942. He proposed to explore the possibility of "operation Torch" with the aim to conquer French North Africa. This, they say, "is the best way to ease the situation on the Russian front in 1942".

British field Marshal Montgomery wrote in his memoirs: "When the North American project has been approved, all understood that the cost of combined resources would mean not only the rejection of any operations in Western Europe in 1942, but the inability to finish the training of the forces in England for large transluminal attack in 1943".

The questions arise: "How could Roosevelt and Churchill to sign in June communiqué on the opening of a second front in 1942, knowing that the day before, in April, they decided to organize a second front only in 1943? How could they assure us in the opening of a second front in 1943, when they started the "operation Torch" in 1942?" Will bring a sure judgment: "the Negotiations on a second front are the perfect illustration of how the bourgeois state is the people, not in words but in deed become aware of their responsibilities in relation to the Soviet ally in the war against fascism".

From mid-July 1942 the Germans began a rapid advance on Stalingrad. In England began to prove that Russians can't resist, "what, perhaps, they can begin negotiations with Germany to conclude a separate peace". This are our allies, of course, didn't want to. They were imperative to the Soviet Union diverted the bulk of the forces of the Wehrmacht.

July 23, 1942, Stalin wrote about the second front: "I'm Afraid that this question begins to take frivolous character. On the basis of the situation on the Soviet-German front, I must say in the strongest possible terms that the Soviet government could not accept the postponement of the organization of the second front in Europe in 1943".

After this letter alarmed Churchill appealed to Stalin to adopt it on August 1. Stalin officially invited in for a convenient time "for joint consideration of urgent questions of the war against Hitler, the threat of which in relation to England, the USA and the USSR has now reached a special forces".

In his memoirs Churchill wrote: "We were all concerned about the reaction of the Soviet government on the unpleasant, but unavoidable message that in 1942 we will not be able to deploy operations on the other side of the English channel". Anglo-Americans feared that this may lead to a separate peace between the USSR and Germany. The telegram British war Cabinet dated 14 August from Moscow where was on a visit, he noted with satisfaction: "during all the negotiations was not even the slightest insinuation that they (the USSR. — A. O.) can stop the war". August 13, Stalin gave Churchill a Memorandum which said: "my colleagues and I think that 1942 represented the most favourable conditions to create a second front in Europe, as almost all forces of German troops, and despite the best forces diverted to the Eastern front".


The price of corned beef and human blood

To compensate the lack of the second front, England and the USA helped us with planes, tanks, cars. The British sent a convoy of ships with weapons and strategic goods to Murmansk. The story of convoy PQ-17 is one of the biggest failures of the naval forces of great Britain during the Second world war. On 4 July 1942 on the orders of Admiral dally pound English cruisers and torpedo boats stopped to protect the trading ships and went West. Took advantage of German naval forces and aircraft, they destroyed the caravan, killing one after another defenceless trading vehicles.

As noted in a Military encyclopedic dictionary, "Convoy PQ-17 is one of the allied convoys during the 2nd world war, suffered in July 1943 the largest losses (23 of 35 vehicles). The main reason: unjustified decision of the British Admiralty to leave the transports at sea without escort ships. The fact of the defeat of the caravan of English and American ruling circles had used as a pretext to stop sending strategic goods to the Soviet Union during the critical period of the battle of Stalingrad". In sunk 23 ships remained at the bottom of 335 vehicles, 430 tanks, 210 aircraft, 99316 tons of steel plate, ammunition, rubber. 188,000 times of tons of military cargo to Soviet ports arrived only 65000 tons. Killed 153 people.

"The victory at sea in Berlin was regarded as winning a major battle on land, equivalent to the defeat of a large army." Based on this fact the defeat of the trade caravan, Churchill wrote: "We do not think it right to risk our fleet of the mother country to the East of Bear island or where it can be attacked the German aircraft based at the coast".

The British government, violating their Alliance obligations, there is no reason a parcel in the near future in the USSR convoy PQ. On 23 July, Stalin replied to Churchill in his message of July 18, a letter in which, inter alia, stated: "the Order of the English Admiralty the 17th the convoy to the transports and leave to return to England and transport ships to crumble and get alone to the Soviet ports without escort our experts believe the strange and unexplained... I could not assume that the British government would deny us delivery of war materials precisely when the Soviet Union especially needs the war materials transportation, in a moment of serious tension on the Soviet-German front".

V. Pikul wrote "a documentary tragedy," "Requiem to caravan PQ-17", where faithfully followed the fate of the ships that sail from Iceland to Soviet ports. He recreated and feat of the Soviet submarine "To—21" under the command of captain II rank N. And. Lunina, which sank the German destroyer and fired four mines (two of which hit the target) severely damaged the German battleship "Tirpitz". He was assigned to the repair, in the autumn of 1944, British aircraft bombed his heavy high-explosive bombs, and it turned over.

To the North, our command has sent major air forces to protect the convoys in the Barents sea. After the protests of the Soviet government came out PQ-18. 27 of 40 vessels safely arrived in Soviet ports. PQ-19 was released on December 22, 1942 from Iceland, from 30 vessels has not lost a single ship and arrived in the Soviet port. In the years 1941-1942 in 15 months in the USSR was sent to 283 transport (124 159 English and American), of which arrived safely in our ports 219, were killed in the path of the vessel 64.

The situation in Germany was facilitated by the fact that the governments of the USA and England have abandoned their commitments to open a second front in 1943. They sabotaged the beginning of hostilities in France, considering them advantageous for that German and Soviet troops would undermine their strength in fierce battles on the Eastern front. In the summer of 1943 was terminated sending naval convoys to our Northern ports. Churchill explained by the fact that there wasn't enough transport ships to provide allied forces on the island of Sicily.

Gromyko wrote in his book "Memorable...": "And at us in the country, and the US knew that the most difficult period of the great Patriotic war — in its first year — the US did not put nearly anything as if waiting, will stand whether the Soviet Union or not. And only when it was revealed that he had survived — one-on-one, then began to make some deliveries." The law on lend-lease the U.S. Congress passed March 11, 1941. He had entitled the U.S. President to transfer, lend war materials to any country, if "its defense against aggression is important for the defense of the United States".

Since March 11, 1942 August 1, 1945, deliveries of the USSR under lend-lease was assessed in the amount of $ 9800000. In the book by G. Kumanev "Next to Stalin" is an article by head of the Main Directorate of the rear of the red Army during the great Patriotic war A. khruleva, which written in detail about the supply of the US to the Soviet Union at that time. Stalin in November 1943 said: "the Allies are regularly supplying us with various weapons and raw materials... we can say without exaggeration that all these things, they greatly facilitate the success of our summer campaign". To break Germany helped us delivery the USA and England, formed the artillery of 2%, on the tanks — 10%, aircraft 12% of the total that were released in the USSR. He received some 375,000 trucks, 446000 machine tools.

Not knowing, apparently, these facts, Granin, blaming our media, believed that we should inform "what and how us actually helped the allies" "Yes, not long opened a second front. But we ate American corned beef, we used "Studebakers" we flew on their aircraft and so on. Why do we not write about it in the history of the war?" Why don't you write? Long ago released data about this assistance. But for the pork stew we are abundantly paid with their blood. It is clear that the stew couldn't replace the opening of a second front. The price for her and our blood are very different.

If not for the victory of the red Army, the Germans would have conquered England, hardly resisted and the USA. It was well aware of their rulers, and their assistance to the USSR was in fact forced and adjusted in such a way that we could be at war, diverting the largest part of the German forces from the West. But they really wanted to, we were carrying as many losses to the Soviet Union in the position of a weak state.

In the spring of 1943 the leadership of the Comintern announced the dissolution. Stalin said on may 28 of that year the correspondent of the Agency "Reuters" king: "the Dissolution of the Communist international is proper and timely because it facilitates the organization of the common onslaught of all freedom-loving Nations against the common enemy — Hitlerism... exposes the lie of the Hitlerites that Moscow allegedly intends to intervene in the Affairs of other States and "to bolchovitinov" them".


The victory of the socialist system

The most bloody for all time of existence of mankind the war ended our brilliant victory, in may 1945, over a defeated Berlin solemnly flew the Soviet flag. Why did we win? Nazi leadership was created to attack the Soviet Union the strongest in the army, all of its executives was headed by well-trained, with considerable battle — winning — the experience of the commanders. Zhukov noted: "the German troops invaded the territory of our homeland with the hope of an easy victory. Especially militant were adjusted young soldiers and officers, consisting of the fascist organizations." Then the Marshal continued, "the combat effectiveness of German soldiers, their upbringing and training in all branches of the armed forces high, but is particularly well prepared for war tank and aircraft parts." German soldier "was stubborn, opinionated and disciplined".

The German command was verified, provided to win: chose the most convenient moment to attack, when the Red Army was in a state which began the reorganization and re-equipment when the combat training of Soviet soldiers and officers suffered considerable flaws, when there was a great shortage of commanders and planes and tanks — the majority — were of the old type. It has carefully examined the location of our military units, airfields, warehouses, was able to mislead the military and political leadership of the USSR and to ensure that military attack was sudden for the red Army.

Granin wrote: "Objectively speaking, we were supposed to lose to the Germans — in all parameters". V. of the Males supported the idea: "to Win the war Hitler could, all the resources for this were both technical and material, and in terms of the availability of outstanding scientists and strategists. The German army was equipped much better and our war with information, intelligence and other points of view on the fortieth level, but rather the sixties, ahead of the rest of the world scene for two decades". The natural question arises: why did our troops have crushed such a great army, which "was equipped much better," ahead of all "for a good two decades"?

In the West appears to many that the brilliant German General staff developed a plan "Barbarossa" was thwarted by unexpected events, prolonged rains, bad roads, very cold in winter. Well, the dilettante Hitler with his amatorski Outlook prevented experienced, wise German generals victoriously, with your head held high (not as prisoners of war) to March on Moscow. Hitler himself blamed for the defeat of its military leaders who are stuck in a rut and failed to adequately implement his brilliant plan. Many of them, he was ruthlessly removed from command of troops.

Believing that the German defeat in the war "aided or unusual climatic conditions," Jacobsen says: "the Underestimation of Russian spaces, and especially human and material forces and reserves of the Soviet Union, was one of the main reasons for the failure of Hitler". A large positive factor was the fact that our leadership in 1939-1940 managed to push the Soviet border to the West.

Molotov said: "We knew that the war was not far off that we are weaker than Germany that we have to retreat... And we need to have as much territory as possible". Military researcher A. Sokolov considered that "only the huge size of the country, its human and material resources, the patriotism of the people prevented a complete collapse". But it should be recognized that only these are in themselves important, factors would not have led us to triumph.

Seeing the reasons for our initial defeats in the war with Germany "in the pre-war development of Soviet society", A. Sokolov failed to assess the vision of Stalin, who in 1931 has correctly identified the main historic task of our country: "We lagged behind the advanced countries for a hundred years. We must run this distance in ten years. Either we do it or they crush us". An outstanding achievement of Soviet power was that of the USSR in 30-ies have done much to significantly reduce this huge backlog. Without the cultural revolution, without collectivization and industrialization we wouldn't have won.

A. Fursov believes that collectivization was way out of the stalled small holdings. She made a "variant of large collective farms, which was broadly in line with the traditions of the Russian peasant", was implemented "with the support of the majority of peasants, but against the will of a significant (25%) and is not the worst part of the peasantry. The peasant problem was solved by the Bolshevik regime rozselyanyuvannya. But it solved the peasant question in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries worldwide. Feature rozselyanyuvannya in the USSR in its cruelty — here beating all records, the Anglo-Saxons, — and the tight timeframe (5-7 years) and on anti-capitalist basis, that is, to focus on interests not of a handful of rural and urban rich men, and the main mass of the rural population".

The "encyclopedia Britannica" said: "within a decade the USSR had indeed been transformed from one of the most backward States in the great industrial power: it was one of the factors that ensured Soviet victory in world war II". Zhukov insisted that the younger generation understood "that the pre-war rate of development has been a bright evidence of the progressiveness of our system", then built "factories that produce aircraft, aircraft engines, artillery systems, communication means... From a military point of view an exceptional value is had the party line on the rapid development of industry in the Eastern districts..."

An important role in our victory played excellent handling and maneuverability of the Soviet economy: it "has acquired the ability to almost instantly deploy military production". L. Isakov has been rightly emphasized: "If the mobilization of industry in the UK has required 22 months, 9 months without direct exposure to the enemy, if the US economy unaffected by the war, were mobilized for 36 months, then the economy of the USSR, with the direct impact of the war, mobilized for 3-4 months by major industries and 7 — completely".

The great Patriotic war for us was the extreme test that in a very rigid form have tested the viability of our social system, ideology and economy. "The adherents of the capitalist system could not understand, — said Zhukov, as our government has managed to implement in such a large scale dismantling and relocation of major economic complexes. The advantage of the socialist system based on public ownership, and there lies the answer to the riddle of "Russian miracle", the resolution of which is still our beating ideological opponents".

From July 1941 to February 1942 was evacuated to the East 2593 industrial enterprises, and they are in a new place soon earned. Is it possible to do it, if they were privately owned? I don't think there is a serious researcher who will have a positive answer to this question. During the war, were deployed to the East more than 20 million people laid 10,000 kilometers of railway lines, 5,000 km of highways, restored 117000 kilometers of railway tracks, bridges 16000. Isn't this evidence is very high, the unsurpassed achievements of the organization of transport and industry?

Alexander OGNEV


RELATED MATERIALS: Politics and Geopolitics