Among opponents of the European Defense Community there are also those who don't support the proposal for a General European Agreement. In this regard the main argument advanced against our proposal is the thesis that the Soviet draft is directed at dislodging the USA from Europe so that the USSR can take its place as the dominating power in Europe. Especially broad use of this thesis is being made in France. Meriting attention in this connection is a conversation between our ambassador in Paris, comrade Vinogradov, and the Gaullist leader [Gaston] Palewski, who said the Soviet proposal is unacceptable in its present form because it excludes the USA from participation in the collective security system in Europe.
According to Palewski attitudes to the Soviet proposal would change if the Soviet government declared the USA could take part in the system of collective security in Europe in its capacity as an occupying power in Germany, bearing in mind that the occupation of Germany would not last forever.
From this statement of Palewski's it follows that the USA's participation in the General European Agreement on a system of collective security would be of a temporary character and limited to the period until the conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany. Taking this into account, the Foreign Ministry considers it advisable to limit the possibilities of using this argument against the Soviet draft by sending the governments of the USA, England and France a note which states that on its part the Soviet government sees no obstacle to the positive resolution of the question of the USA's participation in the General European Agreement on Collective Security in Europe.
In the Foreign Ministry's view it would be inadvisable to declare that the participation of the USA would be of a temporary character. In this regard the Foreign Ministry proceeds from that fact that from the point of view of the interests of the struggle against the European Defense Community it would be inexpedient to indicate the temporary character of the USA's participation in the General European Agreement. It is necessary to consider another argument deployed against the Soviet proposal, namely that it is directed against the North Atlantic Pact and its liquidation.
In order to limit the use of this argument against the Soviet proposal the Foreign Ministry considers it advisable that simultaneously with our proposal about the participation of the USA in the General European Agreement we should, in the same note, pose, in an appropriate form, the question of the possibility of the Soviet Union joining the North Atlantic Pact.
Life of Molotov challenges perception that Stalin’s henchmen were drones
Raising this question would make things difficult for the organizers of the North Atlantic bloc and would emphasize its supposedly defensive character, so that it would not be directed against the USSR and the people's democracies. Most likely, the organizers of the North Atlantic bloc will react negatively to this step of the Soviet government and will advance many different objections. In that event the governments of the three powers will have exposed themselves, once again, as the organizers of a military bloc against other states and it would strengthen the position of social forces conducting a struggle against the formation of the European Defense Community.
Such a negative attitude toward the initiative of the Soviet government could, of course, have its negative side for us in so far as it affected the prestige of the Soviet Union. Taking this into account, the Foreign Ministry proposes that the Soviet note should not state directly the readiness of the USSR to join the North Atlantic bloc but limit itself to a declaration of its readiness to examine jointly with other interested parties the question of the participation of the USSR in the North Atlantic bloc.
Sign In Forgot password? Don't have an account?
Sign in via your Institution Sign in. Purchase Subscription prices and ordering Short-term Access To purchase short term access, please sign in to your Oxford Academic account above. This article is also available for rental through DeepDyve.
Most Read in Culture
View Metrics. Email alerts New issue alert.
- Conformal Field Theory, Automorphic Forms and Related Topics: CFT, Heidelberg, September 19-23, 2011.
- Promise the Moon!
- Nanotechnology and Drug Delivery, Volume One: Nanoplatforms in Drug Delivery.
- The Empty Crown.
- Enhancing Thinking through Problem-based Learning Approaches.
- On the Battlefields of the Cold War: A Soviet Ambassador's Confession By Victor Israelyan.
- Innovation Diffusion as a Spatial Process?
Advance article alerts. Article activity alert. Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. Related articles in Web of Science Google Scholar. Citing articles via Web of Science 4. Mis perceptions of Domestic Politics in the U. Together, they held the line for five decades to help Europe resist communism, even when the odds seemed slim that it would ever be vanquished. John F. When the wall finally fell in and the Soviet Union itself dissolved two years later, President George H.
This decades-long U. Every American should take pride in it. President Trump, however, sees the world through a radically different lens than his predecessors did. For the first time in its history, NATO does not have a strong, principled American leader to guide it.
Just this week, Trump bullied the NATO ally Denmark and canceled a state visit to Copenhagen because its government had the temerity to refuse to sell Greenland to the U. The reaction among the usually stolid Danes has been anger and bewilderment that an American president would treat them with such disrespect. The 20th century was the American century not just because the U. The U.
The lasting message of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is that evil triumphs when democracies fail to stand up to it. And the message of the Baltic Way protests is that America is at its greatest when it stands up for freedom where it is at risk.
The Baltic governments that previous presidents worked so hard to defend must now be worried that, if Russia threatens, Trump will not heed those lessons. We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters theatlantic.