
Day One at Yalta, the Conference That Shaped the World - lermontov
https://lithub.com/day-one-at-yalta-the-conference-that-shaped-the-world-de-gaulle-thinks-hes-joan-of-arc/
======
baybal2
I recommend people in the West to read more on the Yalta process. This single
meeting was what set the fate of the world for the early cold war.

The parallels with today are just too much to ignore.

~~~
Ididntdothis
I agree that it was a very important process but what are the parallels with
today? I think the current situation is more like 1920s and 1930s.

~~~
epicureanideal
I'd be interested to hear in what ways you think it's similar to the 1920s and
1930s.

~~~
Ididntdothis
I think in the 1920s you saw a decay of established institutions, recession
and consequently the rise of populists like the nazis. I think it’s very
similar to that right now. A lot of people think that the system is not
working for them anymore. That leaves an opening for strong leaders that
explain everything by blaming problems on “others”. You see that with trump
and also a lot of countries in Europe.

Yalta was about rebuilding a world system. Right now we have to be careful
about existing systems falling apart.

~~~
redis_mlc
> I think in the 1920s you saw a decay of established institutions, ...

No. The inter-war period was just a lull, as Germany was not occupied and did
not feel defeated. The onerous reparations actually incentived Germany to re-
ignite WW1 into WW2.

Britain and France might as well have asked for it.

> A lot of people think that the system is not working for them anymore.

Rulers don't care about people, especially Trump. Study the de Vos appointment
to understand how profoundly an oligarch he is.

~~~
Spooky23
There’s more to it than just Germany. The postwar disillusionment with the old
order and the boom/bust was amplified by things like radio and telephone.

The world moved faster, and that brought good and bad things. That’s what
worries me... our institutions haven’t caught up with the internet.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> Within just weeks Stalin violated protocols signed at the conference that
> should have guaranteed democratic freedoms for the countries of Eastern
> Europe, and the Iron Curtain began to descend.

> The new United Nations organization set up at Yalta should have been able to
> intervene, but the voting arrangements agreed there allowed the Soviet
> Union, as one of the five permanent members of the Security Council
> possessing a veto, to prevent action.

The Soviet Union had 6.4 million men along the Eastern Front [0], composed of
battle hardened veterans led by brilliant generals such as Zhukov, with many
millions more back in Russia that could be called into service. In 1945 there
was no military force in the world that could have dislodged the Soviet Union
from Eastern Europe.

In addition, while the US was developing nukes, nobody really could be sure
how effective they would be. Thus, Yalta was very pragmatic in not wanting to
get into a futile struggle with Stalin over Eastern Europe as well as enlist
his aid in what was anticipated to be a very bloody invasion of the Japanese
homeland.

0\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)#F...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_\(World_War_II\)#Forces)

~~~
JackFr
If you read a little further in the article you cited, you'd see:

    
    
        Among other goods, Lend-Lease supplied:
    
        58% of the USSR's high octane aviation fuel
        33% of their motor vehicles
        53% of USSR domestic production of expended ordnance 
        (artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives)
        30% of fighters and bombers
        93% of railway equipment (locomotives, freight cars, wide gauge rails, etc.)
        50–80% of rolled steel, cable, lead, and aluminium
        43% of garage facilities (building materials & blueprints)
        12% of tanks and SPGs
        50% of TNT (1942–1944) and 33% of ammunition powder (in 1944)[55]
        16% of all explosives (from 1941–1945, the USSR produced 
        505,000 tons of explosives and received 105,000 tons of Lend-Lease imports)
    

And that is to say nothing of foodstuff.

So had the the British and Americans turned on the Soviets, they would have
faced Zhukov and 6.5 million soldiers, but with limited supplies fuel and
bullets.

~~~
c-smile
Just for the note:

Here is the scan of original Stalin's letter to Soviet ambassador in Britain:

[https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/yuripasholok/765139/15022510...](https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/yuripasholok/765139/15022510/15022510_original.jpg)

about situation when Britain decided to left to itself 156 American Aerocobras
that was shipped to USSR as one of Lend-Lease shipments. This was before
Stalingrad - at the time when Germany advance was perceived as unstoppable.

Yet to note that GB received 3 times more stuff on Lend-Lease than USSR.

~~~
Bendingo
My translation (as a beginner in Russian language) of Stalin's letter is:

"In negotiations with Eden on the issue of Aerocobras you acted cowardly. This
is not worthy of the Soviet ambassador. The British behaviour on the question
of the Aerocobras, I consider the height of arrogance. The British had no
right to redirect our cargo to their account without prior consent. The
reference of the British to the fact that forwarding occurred by order of
America is a jesuitism(?). Not hard to understand that America acted here at
the request of the British. Don't let the British think that we will tolerate
the insults inflicted on us not the first time by the English rulers. Soviet
government requires that 154 Aerocobras captured by the British be immediately
returned to the Soviet Union. We urge you to bring this British piracy to the
attention of layers of British society. I regret departure of Beaverbrook:
while Beaverbrook was in charge of British supply, England faithfully
fulfilled its obligations, after Beaverbrook departed England became
treacherous."

------
c-smile
> With the UN hamstrung ever since by these voting rules, the world continues
> to struggle over how to contain Russian territorial ambitions such as their
> recent occupation of the Crimea ...

That's funny if to take into account that this is about conference held in
just liberated Crimea that was part of Russia (RSFSR) at the time.

~~~
Bendingo
Indeed that irony will be completely lost on most (western) readers.

------
erland
"Churchill wanted to [...] ensure fair and free government in Eastern Europe,
especially Poland, for whom in 1939 Britain had gone to war." Poland was left
largely without help during WW2. If Britain and France would agree for a
preemptive strike against Hitler the whole ordeal could be avoided in the
first place. If the help would come in the 3 first months of the war, most of
the destruction could be averted. Lets not forget about Warsaw uprising in
which 11 old kids were fighting waiting for some sort of help to come from
"allies". Percentage of the destruction was bigger than in Nagasaki, yet no
brit around.

