Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Helsinki Accords ended in Helsinki The Helsinki Agreement

In October 1964, the leadership changed in the USSR. The unity of the socialist camp was broken, relations between East and West were very strained due to the Caribbean crisis. In addition, the German problem remained unresolved, which greatly worried the leadership of the USSR. Under these conditions, the modern history of the Soviet state began. The decisions taken at the 23rd Congress of the CPSU in 1966 confirmed the orientation towards a tougher foreign policy. Peaceful coexistence from that moment was subordinated to a qualitatively different trend towards strengthening the socialist regime, strengthening solidarity between the national liberation movement and the proletariat.

Complexity of the situation

The restoration of absolute control in the socialist camp was complicated by tense relations with China and Cuba. Problems were delivered by events in Czechoslovakia. In June 1967, a congress of writers openly spoke out against the leadership of the party. This was followed by massive student strikes and demonstrations. As a result of the growing opposition, Novotny had to cede the leadership of the party to Dubcek in 1968. The new board decided to carry out a number of reforms. In particular, freedom of speech was established, the HRC agreed to hold alternative elections for leaders. However, the situation was resolved by the introduction of troops from 5 participating states. It was not possible to immediately suppress the unrest. This forced the leadership of the USSR to remove Dubcek and his entourage, placing Husak at the head of the party. On the example of Czechoslovakia, the so-called principle of "limited sovereignty" was implemented. The suppression of reforms halted the modernization of the country for at least 20 years. In 1970, the situation in Poland also became more complicated. The problems were related to the rise in prices, which caused mass uprisings of workers in the Baltic ports. Over the following years, the situation did not improve, the strikes continued. The leader of the unrest was the trade union "Solidarity", which was led by L. Walesa. The leadership of the USSR did not dare to send troops, and the "normalization" of the situation was entrusted to the gene. Jaruzelsky. On December 13, 1981, he introduced martial law in Poland.

Detention

In the early 70s. relations between East and West have changed dramatically. The tension began to ease. This was largely due to the achievement of military parity between the USSR and the USA, East and West. At the first stage, interested cooperation was established between the Soviet Union and France, and then with the FRG. At the turn of the 60-70s. The Soviet leadership began to actively implement a new foreign policy course. Its key provisions were fixed in the Peace Program, which was adopted at the 24th Party Congress. The most important points here are the fact that neither the West nor the USSR renounced the arms race within the framework of this policy. The whole process at the same time acquired a civilized framework. recent history relations between West and East began with a significant expansion of areas of cooperation, mainly Soviet-American. In addition, relations between the USSR and the FRG and France improved. The latter withdrew from NATO in 1966, which served as a good reason for the active development of cooperation.

German problem

To resolve it, the USSR expected to receive mediation assistance from France. However, it was not required, since the Social Democrat W. Brandt became Chancellor. The essence of his policy was that the unification of the territory of Germany was no longer a prerequisite for establishing relations between East and West. It was postponed to the future as a key goal of multilateral negotiations. Thanks to this, the Moscow Treaty was concluded on August 12, 1970. In accordance with it, the parties pledged to respect the integrity of all European countries within their actual borders. Germany, in particular, recognized the western borders of Poland. And a line with the GDR. An important step was also the signing in the autumn of 1971 of a quadripartite treaty on the West. Berlin. This agreement confirmed the groundlessness of political and territorial claims on it by the FRG. This was an absolute victory for the USSR, since all the conditions on which the Soviet Union had insisted since 1945 were fulfilled.

Assessing America's Position

A completely favorable development of events allowed the leadership of the USSR to strengthen its opinion that a cardinal shift in the balance of power in favor of the Soviet Union had taken place in the international arena. And the states of the socialist camp. The position of America and the imperialist bloc was assessed by Moscow as "weakened". This confidence was based on several factors. The key factors were the continued strengthening of the national liberation movement, as well as the achievement of military-strategic parity with America in 1969 in terms of the number of nuclear charges. In accordance with this, the buildup of types of weapons and their improvement, according to the logic of the leaders of the USSR, acted as an integral part of the struggle for peace.

OSV-1 and OSV-2

The need to achieve parity has made the question of bilateral arms limitation, in particular intercontinental ballistic missiles, urgent. Great importance Nixon's visit to Moscow in the spring of 1972 was part of this process. On May 26, the Interim Agreement was signed, defining restrictive measures strategic weapons. This treaty was called OSV-1. He was imprisoned for 5 years. The agreement limited the number of US and USSR ballistic intercontinental missiles launched from submarines. The allowable levels for the Soviet Union were higher, as America possessed weapons carrying multiple warheads. At the same time, the number of charges themselves was not specified in the agreement. This allowed, without violating the contract, to achieve a unilateral advantage in this area. SALT-1, therefore, did not stop the arms race. The formation of a system of agreements was continued in 1974. L. Brezhnev and J. Ford managed to agree on new conditions for the limitation of strategic arms. The signing of the SALT-2 agreement was supposed to be carried out in the 77th year. However, this did not happen, due to the creation in the USA " cruise missiles"- new weapons. America categorically refused to take into account the maximum levels in relation to them. In 1979, the agreement was nevertheless signed by Brezhnev and Carter, but the US Congress did not ratify it until 1989.

Results of the policy of détente

Over the years of the implementation of the Peace Program, serious progress has been made in cooperation between East and West. The total volume of trade increased by 5 times, and the Soviet-American - by 8. The interaction strategy was reduced to signing large contracts with Western companies for the purchase of technologies or the construction of factories. So at the turn of the 60-70s. VAZ was created under an agreement with the Italian corporation Fiat. But this event is more likely to be attributed to the exception than to the rule. For the most part, international programs were limited to inappropriate business trips of delegations. The import of foreign technologies was carried out according to an ill-conceived scheme. Really fruitful cooperation was negatively affected by administrative and bureaucratic obstacles. As a result, many contracts fell short of expectations.

Helsinki Process 1975

Detente in relations between East and West, however, has borne fruit. It made it possible to convene the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The first consultations took place in 1972-1973. The host country of the CSCE was Finland. states) became the center of discussion of the international situation. The first consultations were attended by the ministers of foreign affairs. The first stage took place from 3 to 7 July 1973. Geneva became the platform for the next round of negotiations. The second stage took place from 09/18/1973 to 07/21/1975. It involved several rounds lasting 3-6 months. They were negotiated by delegates and experts nominated by the participating countries. The second stage was the development and subsequent coordination of agreements on items on the agenda of the general meeting. Finland again became the site of the third round. Helsinki hosted top state and political leaders.

Negotiators

Helsinki Accords discussed:

Gene. Secretary Brezhnev.
President of America J. Ford.
German Federal Chancellor Schmidt.
French President V. Giscard d "Estaing.
British Prime Minister Wilson.
President of Czechoslovakia Husak.
Honecker, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED.
Chairman of the State Council Zhivkov.
First Secretary of the Central Committee of the HSWP Kadar and others.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe was held with the participation of representatives of 35 states, including officials from Canada and the United States.

Accepted Documents

The participating countries approved the Declaration of Helsinki. In accordance with it, proclaimed:

Inviolability of state borders.
Mutual renunciation of the use of force in conflict resolution.
Non-intervention in the internal politics of the participating states.
Respect for human rights and other provisions.

In addition, the heads of delegations signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. It contained agreements to be executed as a whole. The main directions fixed in the document were:

Key principles

The final act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe included 10 provisions, in accordance with which the norms of interaction were determined:

sovereign equality.
Non-use of force or threat of its use.
Respect for sovereign rights.
Territorial integrity.
The inviolability of borders.
Respect for freedoms and human rights.
non-intervention in domestic politics.
Equality of peoples and their right to independently manage their own destiny.
Interaction between countries.
Fulfillment of international legal obligations.

The Helsinki Final Act acted as a guarantee of the recognition and inviolability of post-war borders. This was beneficial primarily to the USSR. In addition, the Helsinki process made it possible to formulate and impose obligations on all participating countries to strictly observe freedoms and human rights.

Short term consequences

What prospects did the Helsinki process open up? The date of its holding is considered by historians as the apogee of detente in the international arena. The USSR was most interested in the issue of post-war borders. It was extremely important for the Soviet leadership to achieve recognition of the inviolability of post-war borders, territorial integrity countries, which meant international legal consolidation of the situation in Eastern Europe. All this happened as part of a compromise. The question of human rights is a problem that interested those who attended the Helsinki process. The year of the CSCE was the starting point for development in the USSR. The international legal consolidation of the obligatory observance of human rights made it possible to launch a campaign to protect them in the Soviet Union, which at that time was actively pursued by Western states.

It is worth saying that since 1973, separate negotiations have been held between representatives of the countries participating in the Warsaw Pact and NATO. The issue of arms reduction was discussed. But the expected success was never achieved. This was due to the tough position of the Warsaw Pact states, which were superior to NATO in terms of conventional types of weapons and did not want to reduce them.

Military-strategic balance

The Helsinki process ended in a compromise. After signing the final document, the USSR began to feel like a master and began to install SS-20 missiles in Czechoslovakia and the GDR, which were distinguished by an average range. Restriction on them was not provided for under the SALT agreements. As part of the human rights campaign, which has intensified sharply since Western countries after the end of the Helsinki process, the position of the Soviet Union became very tough. Accordingly, the United States has taken a number of retaliatory measures. After refusing to ratify the SALT-2 treaty in the early 1980s, America deployed missiles (Pershing and cruise missiles) in Western Europe. They could reach the territory of the USSR. As a result, a military-strategic balance was established between the blocs.

Long-Term Consequences

The arms race had a rather negative effect on the economic condition of countries whose military-industrial orientation did not decrease. The parity with the United States, achieved before the start of the Helsinki process, concerned primarily ballistic intercontinental missiles. Since the end of the 70s. the general crisis began to have a negative impact on the defense industries. The USSR gradually began to lag behind in certain types of weapons. This came to light after the appearance of "cruise missiles" in America. The lag became more obvious after the beginning of the development of the program for the "strategic defense initiative" in the United States.

Europe was the place where both world wars originated and suffered the most from them, so the desire to create a system that would exclude the possibility of a new military conflict was universal among Europeans. In the first period after the end of World War II, the members of the Anti-Hitler Coalition continued to cooperate on many issues. Peace treaties were signed and ratified with Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Romania and Finland, who fought on the side of Nazi Germany. In accordance with them, these states were obliged to eradicate fascism, pursue a peaceful and democratic policy in the future, agreed with the established borders, and paid reparations. At the same time, all prisoners of war from these states were released. The territorial dispute between Yugoslavia and Italy was not resolved then, it was settled in 1954. However, the main development trend international relations in Europe, even then there was a deterioration in relations between the great victorious powers and the beginning cold war. It is no coincidence that in his speech at Fulton in March 1946, Churchill spoke primarily of Europe. Indeed, it was Europe that became the main field of confrontation between the two socio-political systems during the Cold War.

The first period of the Cold War in Europe spans the period from the end of World War II to the Berlin Crisis and the construction of the wall in August 1961. His main feature is that the Yalta-Potsdam agreements were implemented in practice and there was a clear division of Europe into two camps with a minimum number of neutral and non-aligned states. At the same time, Europe for the first time faced with a situation where it is not the center of world development.

The most complex and explosive in these years was the German problem. Cooperation between the four victorious powers, which divided Germany and its capital Berlin into zones of occupation, gradually ceased. Moreover, the three Western powers pursued an increasingly coordinated policy in their respective zones. The United States extended the Marshall Plan to all three western zones, which important role in rebuilding their economies.

Social development in West and East Germany began to differ more and more, in essence it went in opposite directions. Under these conditions, the Allies were unable to work out even the foundations of a peace treaty with Germany. The general administration of Berlin, which initially functioned well, also ceased. It was in Berlin in 1948-1949. Europe's first major Cold War crisis occurred. Holding in western zones The occupation of the currency reform led to an influx of depreciated marks into the eastern part of the country, which created serious problems for its economy. In response, the Soviet occupation authorities completely closed the border with West Berlin. At the same time, they aimed not only to protect the economic interests of their zone, but also to try to squeeze the Western powers out of their sectors in Berlin. However, the United States showed firmness by organizing the airlift of food and other essentials. Convinced that the Western powers would not retreat, Moscow lifted the blockade.

Berlin Crisis 1948-1949 became both a reflection of the general deterioration in relations between the allies and an incentive for increased confrontation. This was most clearly manifested in the split of Germany. In May 1949, the Parliamentary Council, acting with the consent of the Western powers, adopted the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany and announced the creation of this state, and in October 1949, in eastern zone the GDR was proclaimed. Both German states almost immediately joined the opposing blocs. The German government, headed by Chancellor K. Adenauer, has set a course for speedy integration into European and Euro-Atlantic structures (the European Community, NATO, etc.), and also declared that only it has the right to speak on behalf of the entire German people in the international arena. In turn, the GDR joined the CMEA and the Warsaw Pact, but at that time received international recognition only from the countries of "people's democracy". Tensions in the center of Europe especially increased during the years of the Korean War. Since in 1952 the Communist Party of the Federal Republic of Germany put forward the slogan of the "revolutionary overthrow of the Adenauer government", Bonn was seriously afraid of a Soviet invasion.

The improvement in Soviet-American relations after the death of Stalin and the election of Eisenhower as US President also affected the situation in Europe. After the end of the Korean War, Western Europe ceased to be afraid of a Soviet attack. The process of normalizing relations between the USSR and the FRG began. In 1955, during Adenauer's visit to Moscow, agreements were reached on ending the state of war, releasing German prisoners of war, and establishing diplomatic relations. At the same time, Bonn refused to establish diplomatic relations with the countries of the "People's Democracy", which recognized the GDR. The FRG's refusal to recognize the GDR and the post-World War II borders in Central and Eastern Europe caused great concern in Moscow. Despite the exchange of ambassadors and some development of trade and economic ties, the FRG continued to be the main target of attacks by Soviet propaganda, which accused the West German authorities of reviving militarism and revanchism. These attacks became especially sharp after the FRG joined NATO and the creation of the Bundeswehr, which soon turned into a real military force. This caused genuine alarm among the leadership and the population of the USSR, since the memory of the victims and sufferings of the Second World War was still very strong.

A positive development in Central Europe was the resolution of the problem of Austria. The latter and its capital Vienna were also divided by the victorious great powers into four zones of occupation. However, unlike East Germany, the USSR did not try to take any steps in its zone to establish the "people's democracy" regime. At the same time, Moscow for a long time linked the settlement of the question of Austria with the signing of a peace treaty with Germany. After Stalin's death, the Soviet approach became more pragmatic. In 1955, the State Treaty was signed, according to which Austria became a neutral state, and foreign troops left its territory. The status of a neutral state objectively contributed to an increase in the role of Austria in international affairs. Vienna became the venue for various negotiations, including Soviet-American meetings at highest level in 1961 and 1979, while Austria itself in a number of cases acted as an intermediary in some, including delicate, contacts between East and West.

To a large extent, the breakthrough event was the visit to Great Britain in the spring of 1956 by Khrushchev and Bulganin. For the first time in the history of the Soviet state, its top leaders paid an official visit to a capitalist country. This generated a lot of interest all over the world. Practical results were insignificant, but the exchange of views and discussion of European security problems proved to be useful for a better mutual understanding. In 1959, Prime Minister G. Macmillan paid a return visit to Moscow. In the 1950s-1960s. The volume of trade between the two countries has been constantly growing. In 1959, Great Britain was the first of the NATO countries to sign a five-year trade agreement with the USSR. During these years, it was London that was considered in Moscow as the main partner among the states of Western Europe.

In general, in the mid-1950s. in Central Europe the dividing lines were drawn quite clearly. Only the question of West Berlin remained complex and controversial.

Northern Europe in the late 1940s and early 1950s. there was a kind of balance of power. Norway and Denmark joined NATO, stipulating that in Peaceful time foreign bases and troops will not be placed on their territory. Finland, under pressure from the USSR, signed in 1948 the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, which provides not only for the provision of assistance to each other in the event of renewed aggression on the part of Germany or its allies, but also the right of the USSR, under certain circumstances, to send its troops to the territory of Finland. Stalia did not try to bring the communists to power here (according to some reports, the issue of a coup d'état in Moscow was discussed, but was decided in the negative). However, Finland in many ways found itself in the orbit of Soviet influence for almost all the years of the Cold War. At the same time, Moscow did not try to achieve a change in the social system in Finland. Moreover, Khrushchev and Brezhnev met with the leaders of the Finnish communists, as a rule, in the USSR, and not in Finland. Finnish politics have also evolved. If President J. Paasikivi sought to limit trade and economic ties with the USSR, fearing to become completely dependent, then U. Kenkonen, who replaced him in 1956, began to seek (and not without success) from the USSR economic benefits in exchange for loyalty in the areas of international politics and security. By the re-election of Kenkonen in 1962, this line was firmly established in Soviet-Finnish relations.

Sweden officially continued to pursue a policy of neutrality, but in practice in the 1950s. established informal contacts with NATO, which were supposed to work in the event of a major military conflict in Europe. Such a balance of power made the region of Northern Europe already in the 1950s. one of the most peaceful during the Cold War.

In Southern Europe, the situation also gradually acquired quite definite features and parameters. The main focus of tension here was Greece, where in 1947-1949. there was a civil war. The Communist Party of Greece started it largely under the influence of the Yugoslav leadership, and the main help came from Yugoslavia and Albania. The conflict between Tito and the Information Bureau led to the end of Yugoslav support (the Greek communists sided with Stalin) and the defeat of the communists, who withdrew the remnants of their troops to Albania. Turkey found itself under direct pressure from the USSR, which at the allied conferences during the Second World War raised the issue of joint control over the Black Sea straits, and in 1946 raised the issue of the return of Kars and Ardahan, which belonged to the First World War Russian Empire. After Yugoslavia's rupture with the Information Bureau, the situation on its borders with Albania, Bulgaria and Hungary escalated sharply, and it came to skirmishes and other serious incidents. Fears of the Soviet invasion of Yugoslavia then were many. In 1947, Truman announced his support for Greece and Turkey in opposing communism (the "Truman Doctrine"). Eisenhower, even before taking office, spoke in favor of strengthening the southern flank of NATO by including Spain, Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey. In 1952, Türkiye and Greece officially became members of NATO.

The issue of admitting a communist country to NATO caused controversy. France and Great Britain objected, and the Yugoslav leadership was not sure of the expediency of this step. In this regard, in 1953, the Balkan Pact was concluded between Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey, which could become the basis for connecting Yugoslavia to NATO. However, after Stalin's death, Yugoslavia no longer feared a Soviet invasion. Activity under the Balkan Pact has been minimal in practice. Moreover, Belgrade has embarked on a path of increasing its role in the world by creating and leading the non-aligned movement, as well as maneuvering between the two blocs in order to obtain economic support from both. In 1961, Albania, which came into conflict with the USSR, actually left the communist bloc. With Soviet troops withdrawn from Bulgaria and Romania, the Soviet military presence (submarines) was terminated in Albania, and American bases in Turkey and Greece were limited, the level of military confrontation in the Balkans was negligible. By the beginning of the 1960s. position of all countries in new system coordinates have already been determined.

The last question on which by the turn of the 1950-1960s. full clarity was not achieved, only Berlin remained. In the second half of the 1950s. The USSR repeatedly put forward various projects in relation to Berlin, the main idea of which was the withdrawal of troops from the Western powers. Naturally, they were rejected. At the same time, the USSR insisted that West Berlin was a special unit, and not part of the FRG. Meanwhile, the gap in levels economic development and life between the FRG and the GDR constantly increased. The flight of the population from East Germany to the West across the open border in Berlin became more and more massive. To put an end to this, the leaders of the USSR and the GDR, as already mentioned, decided to create powerful fences between East and West Berlin, which went down in history as the Berlin Wall. It was she who divided the huge city in the very center of Europe into two parts that became for the Europeans for almost three decades a symbol of the Cold War.

The second stage of the Cold War in Europe is the period from the construction of the Berlin Wall in August 1961 to the turn in Soviet foreign policy in the mid-1980s. towards a "new political thinking" and a "common European home". On the whole, it is characterized by a significant degree of stability, although certain fluctuations, both in the direction of forcing tension and detente, occurred constantly.

First of all, throughout this period there was an unrelenting arms race. Enormous in number and armament troops were concentrated in Central Europe. A significant contingent of US, British and French troops was permanently stationed in the FRG. The withdrawal of France in 1966 from the military structure of NATO did not affect the size of its contingent. At the same time, the group of Soviet troops in Germany was one of the best and most powerful groupings of the USSR Armed Forces. Since 1968, Soviet troops have been in Czechoslovakia. Since 1945 they have not been withdrawn from Hungary and Poland. Both opposing groups were armed with tactical nuclear weapons and other types of weapons. mass destruction. Such a concentration of troops and weapons, as in Central Europe in the 1960s - early 1980s, has probably never happened in history. However, during the entire period of confrontation between the two groups, not a single armed clash occurred.

Both opposing blocs waged a fierce ideological war and carried out propaganda campaigns against each other. The headquarters of Radio Liberty and Free Europe were located in Munich, which constantly broadcast in Russian and the languages of the Warsaw Pact countries. Similar broadcasts were made by the Voice of America, the BBC, the Deutsche Welle, and others. The USSR and its allies spent huge amounts of money on creating a whole chain of jammers for these broadcasts. Strict restrictions on contacts between people were adopted. However, completely isolated from outside world was impossible. The comparison of levels of economic development and living standards between the two parts of Europe (and not only Germany) became more and more against the communist bloc. This, of course, weakened the position of the Warsaw Pact and CMEA in the confrontation with the West.

Despite the fact that the main negotiations took place at the bloc level, bilateral relations of states, especially large ones, also played a certain role. Until the mid 1960s. Great Britain remained the main Soviet partner in Western Europe. In 1967, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR A. N. Kosygin visited London, British Prime Minister G. Wilson repeatedly visited Moscow. Trade and economic ties also developed successfully. However, after the visit of French President de Gaulle to the USSR in 1966 and France's withdrawal from the NATO military organization, the Soviet leadership began to pay more and more attention to relations with this country. Soviet-French dialogue at the highest level in the late 1960s - 1970s. walked constantly. Despite disagreements on many issues of global politics (the non-proliferation nuclear weapons, a partial ban on nuclear tests, etc.) on the problems of European security, the positions of both countries turned out to be close.

Shortly after the construction of the Berlin Wall, the USSR took steps to sound out the possibility of improving relations with the FRG, but after the resignation of Khrushchev in 1964, they temporarily stopped. They were resumed at the end of the 1960s, when the “grand coalition” of the CDU / CSU (Christian Democratic Union / Christian Social Union) and the Social Democratic Party of Germany came to power in Germany, and the Vice-Chancellor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Willy Brandt became a Social Democrat. After Brandt became chancellor in 1969, an important shift took place in the "Ostpolitik" of the FRG. In Moscow, on August 12, 1970, an agreement was signed between the USSR and the FRG, according to which the FRG recognized the inviolability of the borders existing in Europe. This was the main moment for the leadership of the USSR, which in turn agreed that this did not limit the right of the German people to self-determination. Then the FRG signed similar agreements with Polynia (1970) and Czechoslovakia (1973), where, in particular, it agreed to recognize the Munich Agreement of 1938 as null and void from the moment of signing, as well as an agreement on the foundations of relations with the GDR (1972). In 1973, the FRG and the GDR were simultaneously admitted to the UN. In 1971, the USSR, USA, France and Great Britain signed an agreement on West Berlin, which significantly defused the situation. A number of agreements were also reached by the Senate of West Berlin and the authorities of the GDR. West Berliners were given the opportunity to meet with their East German relatives, but visits in the opposite direction remained prohibited. In the second half of the 1960s. the economic ties between the USSR and Italy sharply intensified, a symbol of which was the construction car factory"Fiat" in the city of Togliatti.

However, the biggest shifts on the European continent occurred in connection with the start of multilateral negotiations on security and cooperation. In 1966, the Warsaw Pact countries took the initiative to hold a pan-European conference on security and cooperation. Initially, the West greeted such an initiative coldly, considering it another propaganda step in order to tear Western Europe away from the United States and achieve recognition of the GDR. However, Brandt's "Eastern policy" removed the second story, and the USSR at some stage agreed to participate in the US-Canada meeting. This seriously changed the situation: before that, the USSR proposed various projects for creating a European security system without the participation of the United States, which was seen by the West as an attempt to split NATO. Finland played an important mediating role in the consultations and negotiations. In the 1950s-1960s. The USSR opposed active participation Finland in international affairs, fearing that this country will weaken ties with him. In the early 1970s the Soviet leadership came to the conclusion that it was Finland that would be able to become a conductor of Soviet ideas about European security among Western states and began to support its mediating role.

In addition to political factors, other factors, primarily economic ones, contributed to the change in the situation in Europe. The USSR and its allies were experiencing growing economic problems and hoped to at least partially solve them through the development of trade and economic cooperation with Western Europe. It was about a sharp increase in the supply of oil and gas in exchange for the purchase of new technologies and some agricultural products. The embargo on oil supplies to Israel's allies, announced in the fall of 1973 by the Arab countries, helped the USSR to successfully advance in world markets, including Western Europe, and create certain reserves of freely convertible currency. A sharp aggravation of Soviet-Chinese relations also played a certain role in Moscow's desire to ease tensions in Europe.

In 1973, a meeting of foreign ministers of 35 European states, the United States and Canada took place in Helsinki (Albania condemned the Helsinki process and joined it only after the fall of the communist regime), at which there was a general exchange of views on the state of international relations in Europe, workers were formed groups for the preparation of the final document, organizational issues have been resolved. Subsequently, for almost two years, preparatory work was going on in Geneva for the conference, which took place in the summer of 1975 in Helsinki. At the initiative of the USSR, the final stage of the meeting was held at the highest level and the Final Act was signed by the top leaders of the participating countries. From the USSR, the Final Act was signed general secretary Central Committee of the CPSU L. I. Brezhnev.

The final act was unique in many ways. It was not subject to UN registration as international treaty, but was a document in which the signatory countries voluntarily assumed obligations. The Final Act proclaimed the principles of mutual relations between the signatory states (the Soviet leadership appreciated this part of the document so highly that the principles proclaimed in it were included in a separate article in the new Constitution of the USSR in 1977), provided for steps to build confidence (notification of major military maneuvers and inviting foreign observers to them; the Soviet Union was the first to fulfill this point), the development of trade and economic cooperation on a bilateral and multilateral basis, including the provision of most favored nation treatment to all participants, the comprehensive development of cooperation in the humanitarian sphere and the continuation of multilateral meetings and consultations in the future .

In 1977-1978. in Belgrade, in 1980-1983. in Madrid and in 1986 in Vienna, meetings of the participants of the conference were held, at which the implementation of the Final Act and further steps in the development of pan-European cooperation were discussed.

In parallel with this, the CMEA and the European Communities were negotiating mutual relations, while NATO and the Warsaw Pact Organization were negotiating the issue of limiting troops and armaments in Central Europe.

In the 1970s Basically, the relations of the USSR with the largest European states developed successfully. A serious diplomatic conflict occurred only in 1971 with Great Britain, but even here the situation quickly changed for the better. However, the FRG had already become the main partner of the USSR in Western Europe, with which trade and economic ties were rapidly developing.

At the turn of the 1970-1980s. the situation in Europe worsened. The main reasons for this were the deployment of medium-range missiles, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, as well as the tragic incident with the South Korean Boeing. Naturally, the worsening of Soviet-American relations also affected the situation in Europe. R. Reagan's conservative course received the full support of British Prime Minister M. Thatcher (1979-1990). However, the dialogue continued in many areas - Brezhnev's summit meetings were held with French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing in 1980 and the leadership of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1981. Despite numerous difficulties, the work of the Madrid Conference, which was on the verge of collapse several times, was completed. . It was more difficult with the negotiations between the CMEA and the European Communities, NATO and the Warsaw Pact: they turned out to be practically frozen.

Thus, in the 1960s - the first half of the 1980s. It was Europe that was the center of the Cold War, it was here that the most obvious confrontation between the two socio-political systems took place. However, it was here that the Helsinki process of multilateral negotiations on security and cooperation issues was launched, which objectively created the prerequisites for the end of the Cold War and the dismantling of the Yalta-Potsdam system in Europe.

The third, final stage of the Cold War in Europe is connected in many respects with the turn of the new Soviet leadership, headed by Gorbachev, towards a “new political thinking” and a “common European home”.

The improvement in Soviet-American relations and the signing of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty created a much more favorable situation in Europe. At the same time, the USSR took a number of steps to unilaterally reduce troops and conventional weapons in Europe. Negotiations on the reduction of troops and armaments in Central Europe also got off the ground, and it was decided to consider this issue in a broader pan-European context. The outcome of these negotiations was the signing of the Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe in the fall of 1990. The Treaty provided for the reduction of troops, weapons and set ceilings both for individual countries and for both military blocs. By itself, the idea of a significant reduction in troops and armaments in Europe was, of course, positive, but the signing of this treaty was clearly too late: by the autumn of 1990, the Warsaw Pact Organization was practically no longer functioning, and in 1991 it officially ceased to exist. In the USSR, this Treaty was criticized by some politicians and the military, but a decision was made (confirmed by Russia after the collapse of the USSR) to implement it, despite the changed situation.

In the area of economic cooperation, the dialogue also intensified, but acquired a slightly different content. The crisis became so obvious that even before the "velvet revolutions" of 1989, the CMEA member countries embarked on the path of separate negotiations with the European communities. This was also done by the Soviet Union, which in 1989 established diplomatic relations with the European Commission. The transition of the countries of Central and Eastern

Europe to a market economy meant the end of the CMEA, which could only function if its members had a planned, administrative-command economy. In the summer of 1991, the CMEA also officially ceased to exist.

After the conference in Vienna in 1986, the Helsinki process became noticeably more active. Within its framework, negotiations, consultations, and forums were held on almost the entire range of issues included in the Final Act of 1975. The most important were the Stockholm agreements on the expansion of confidence-building measures: advance notification was provided not only about maneuvers, but also about large-scale deployment of troops, the exchange of plans military activities, conducting spot inspections on the ground, etc.

The commitment of all states - participants of the Helsinki process to the principles proclaimed in the Final Act of 1975 created favorable international conditions for changing the socio-political system in the Eastern European countries of "people's democracy". Since Soviet intervention, as in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968), or pressure from the USSR, as in the case of Poland (1980-1981), were already ruled out, the ruling Communist Parties preferred to peacefully abandon their monopoly on power and go for free elections. Bloodshed occurred only in Romania and Yugoslavia. In Romania, the then communist leader N. Ceausescu attempted to use force against the protesters, which led to bloody clashes, his arrest and execution. In connection with the end of the Cold War, Yugoslavia found itself in a difficult situation: the interest of both blocs in attracting it to their side practically disappeared, and economic assistance was sharply reduced accordingly. This led to a serious socio-economic crisis, exacerbation of interethnic contradictions, and the emergence of conflicts. In the spring of 1991, Yugoslavia collapsed, and several new states appeared in its place, within which armed conflicts and clashes also continued.

However, the biggest shift in Europe was, of course, the unification of Germany. The fact that the construction of a "common European home" is impossible without such a union was obvious to all participants in the negotiations. However, hardly any of them imagined that events would develop so rapidly. The democratization movement forced the GDR authorities in November 1989 to announce the opening of the border with West Berlin. The jubilant crowds of people literally demolished the Berlin Wall at a number of sites in the city center. The collapse of the Berlin Wall was essentially a symbolic end to the Cold War in Europe. In March 1990, free elections were held in the GDR, which were won by supporters of early unification. This did not raise objections from the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France. Almost all contentious issues, and in October 1990 Germany again became a single state.

All these changes paved the way for a new Summit on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which took place in November 1990 in Paris. It adopted the Charter of a New Europe, proclaiming the need to bring pan-European cooperation to a new level, to overcome the consequences of the split in Europe during the Cold War.

During the collapse of the USSR in 1991, most European states took a low profile. They provided explicit support only to the independence movement in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. After the Soviet Union ceased to exist, all newly independent states were admitted to the Helsinki process. This made its composition more diverse and broad, but at the same time made the decision-making process more difficult.

Thus, Europe as a whole successfully overcame the period of the Cold War. Although both opposing blocs concentrated their main forces precisely here, not a single shot was fired from either side. It was in Europe that the Helsinki process of multilateral negotiations was born and developed, which made it possible to overcome this confrontation.

The restructuring process European system international relations on principles designed to ensure peace, security and cooperation. It began with the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the final stage of which took place in Helsinki in 1975. The leaders of 33 European states, as well as the United States and Canada, took part in the Conference.

On August 1, 1975, the signing ceremony of the Final Act took place in the plenary hall of the Finlandia Palace.

The signing of the Final Act became possible in the conditions of the onset of detente in international tension. He marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the elimination of its consequences. Historically, the act is associated with the decisions of the powers of the anti-Hitler coalition on post-war device Europe, which certain forces tried to revise in their favor during the years of the Cold War. The Soviet Union became the initiator of the convening of the Conference and an active participant in all its stages.

The Final Act, signed in Helsinki, opens with a Declaration of Principles on which the common European system of international relations should be based: sovereign equality mutual renunciation of the use of force or threat of force, inviolability of borders, territorial integrity of states, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-interference in internal affairs, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, equality and the right of peoples to control their own destiny, cooperation between states, conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law. The Declaration was an authoritative confirmation and development of the basic principles international law enshrined in the UN Charter (see United Nations).

The Helsinki Act also includes a Document on Confidence-Building Measures and Certain Aspects of Security and Disarmament, which contains provisions for prior notification of military exercises and major movements troops, on the exchange of military observers, on other confidence-building measures and on questions of disarmament. Many of these measures are unprecedented in international relations.

Considerable attention is paid to cooperation in the field of economy, science, technology and security environment. Regulations on the development of trade and industrial cooperation have been established. Special attention to cooperation in the field of the latest areas of science and technology. important place occupy positions on cooperation in the humanitarian fields: contacts between people, information, culture, education. In conclusion, further steps are outlined after the Meeting. In other words, from the very beginning it was a question of a continuous process in the course of which there would be a strengthening general security and development of all-round cooperation.

The USSR did a lot of work to implement the act in its domestic and foreign policy. Article 29 was included in the Constitution of the USSR, which established that the basis of relations with other states are principles that completely coincide with those listed in the act. In the humanitarian sphere, laws on citizenship, legal status foreign citizens, the rules for the stay of foreign citizens in the USSR and the transit passage of foreign citizens through the territory of the USSR, etc. Numerous agreements were concluded on economic, scientific, technical and other types of cooperation with European countries.

The Helsinki Act not only marked a turning point in the development of international relations in Europe, but also gave the rest of the world a model for solving the most complex problems. He influenced the world system of international relations as a whole. However, the opportunities opened by him were not used to a sufficient extent. A new aggravation of international tension stood in the way of implementing the provisions of the act. The former Soviet leadership also bore its share of responsibility for this. The introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan had an extremely negative effect on the Helsinki process. During the period of stagnation, many provisions of a humanitarian nature were not implemented in the USSR either.

And yet, despite the aggravation of tension, the Helsinki process did not stop, but continued to develop. Meetings and conferences in Belgrade (1977-1978), Madrid (1980-1983), Stockholm (1984-1986), Vienna (1986-1989) testify to this. At the Madrid meeting, it was decided to convene a Conference on Confidence, Security and Disarmament Building Measures in Europe. Its first stage took place in Stockholm (1984-1986) and opened in the face of a sharp deterioration in the international situation. The situation changed radically with the start of transformations in the USSR, which laid the foundation for fundamental changes in international relations. The results were reflected in the adoption of the Stockholm Document, which was a huge achievement in the development Helsinki Process. The document obligated states to give advance notice of exercises, troop movements above the established parameters, exchange annual plans for military activities subject to notification, invite observers, and even conduct foreign inspections on the ground. Of particular importance was the agreement reaffirming the obligation not to use force in all its forms, including armed force.

At the Vienna meeting, which became a new stage in the development of the Helsinki process, much attention was paid to cooperation in the field of economy, science and technology, the environment, etc.

An important step in the development of the Helsinki process was the Paris Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1990. It was timed to coincide with the signing of the Treaty on the Reduction of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. The agreement provided for a significant reduction in the armed forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact Organization (WTS) members, thus achieving a balance at a significantly lower level. As a result, the possibility of a surprise attack was practically excluded.

A Joint Declaration of 22 states was adopted, which is a multilateral political commitment of non-aggression.

The Conference's central document is the Paris Charter for a New Europe, which was signed by the leaders of 35 states. The signatories of the Charter committed themselves to building and strengthening democracy as the only system of government in their countries; to help each other in order to make democratic gains irreversible.

The Conference participants proceeded from the indivisibility of security, believing that the security of each of them is linked to the security of the others. Further development of cooperation in the field of economy and environmental protection is envisaged. We are talking about deeper integration into the international economic and financial system.

The importance of the Paris meeting for the formation organizational structure Helsinki Process, for its institutionalization. The USSR was the initiator here. A mechanism has been established for regular meetings and consultations at the level of heads of state and government. The central forum for political consultation will be the Council of Foreign Ministers, to which the Committee of Experts will be attached as a subsidiary body. To serve these bodies, a Secretariat is being created in Prague.

The Center for Conflict Prevention, which is being established in Vienna and is designed to monitor the military-political situation in Europe, deserves special attention. A bureau for free elections is being set up in Warsaw to facilitate the exchange of information about elections. A parliamentary assembly of the CSCE (now the OSCE) is to be created, consisting of representatives of the parliaments of all participating countries.

The Paris Conference played an important role in defining common European values and principles and set far-reaching goals for cooperation, up to and including integration. Participants have made broad security commitments. The organizational foundations of the Helsinki process were laid. All this marks the onset of a new stage in the development of the process, which reflects its vitality and meaning.

The process of restructuring the European system of international relations on principles designed to ensure peace, security and cooperation. It began with the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the final stage of which took place in Helsinki in 1975. The leaders of 33 European states, as well as the United States and Canada, took part in the Conference. The signing of the Final Act became possible in the conditions of the onset of detente in international tension. He marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the elimination of its consequences. Historically, the act is associated with the decisions of the powers of the anti-Hitler coalition on the post-war structure of Europe, which certain forces tried to revise in their favor during the years of the Cold War. The Soviet Union became the initiator of the convening of the Conference and an active participant in all its stages.

The Final Act, signed in Helsinki, opens with a Declaration of Principles on which the pan-European system of international relations should be based: sovereign equality, mutual renunciation of the use of force or threat of force, inviolability of borders, territorial integrity of states, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-interference in internal affairs, respect for human rights rights and fundamental freedoms, equality and the right of peoples to decide their own destiny, cooperation between states, conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law. The Declaration was an authoritative confirmation and development of the basic principles of international law enshrined in the UN Charter (see United Nations).

On August 1, 1975, the signing ceremony of the Final Act took place in the plenary hall of the Finlandia Palace.

The Helsinki Act also includes a Document on Confidence-Building Measures and Certain Aspects of Security and Disarmament, which contains provisions on prior notification of military exercises and major troop movements, on the exchange of military observers, on other confidence-building measures and on disarmament matters. Many of these measures are unprecedented in international relations.

Considerable attention is paid to cooperation in the field of economy, science, technology and environmental protection. Regulations on the development of trade and industrial cooperation have been established. Particular attention to cooperation in the field of the latest areas of science and technology. An important place is occupied by provisions on cooperation in the humanitarian fields: contacts between people, information, culture, education. In conclusion, further steps are outlined after the Meeting. In other words, from the very beginning it was about a continuous process in the course of which the strengthening of common security and the development of all-round cooperation would take place.

The USSR did a lot of work to implement the act in its domestic and foreign policy. Article 29 was included in the Constitution of the USSR, which established that the basis of relations with other states are principles that completely coincide with those listed in the act. In the humanitarian sphere, laws were adopted on citizenship, on the legal status of foreign citizens, the rules for the stay of foreign citizens in the USSR and the transit passage of foreign citizens through the territory of the USSR, etc. Numerous agreements were concluded on economic, scientific, technical and other types of cooperation with European countries.

And yet, despite the aggravation of tension, the Helsinki process did not stop, but continued to develop. Meetings and conferences in Belgrade (1977-1978), Madrid (1980-1983), Stockholm (1984-1986), Vienna (1986-1989) testify to this. At the Madrid meeting, it was decided to convene a Conference on Confidence, Security and Disarmament Building Measures in Europe. Its first stage took place in Stockholm (1984-1986) and opened in the face of a sharp deterioration in the international situation. The situation changed radically with the start of transformations in the USSR, which laid the foundation for fundamental changes in international relations. The results were reflected in the adoption of the Stockholm Document, which was a huge achievement in the development of the Helsinki process. The document obligated states to give advance notice of exercises, troop movements above the established parameters, exchange annual plans for military activities subject to notification, invite observers, and even conduct foreign inspections on the ground. Of particular importance was the agreement reaffirming the obligation not to use force in all its forms, including armed force.

At the Vienna meeting, which became a new stage in the development of the Helsinki process, much attention was paid to cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology, the environment, etc. An important step in the development of the Helsinki process was the Paris Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1990. It was timed to by the time of the signing of the Treaty on the Reduction of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. The agreement provided for a significant reduction in the armed forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact Organization (WTS) members, thus achieving a balance at a significantly lower level. As a result, the possibility of a surprise attack was practically excluded.

A Joint Declaration of 22 states was adopted, which is a multilateral political commitment of non-aggression. The Conference's central document is the Paris Charter for a New Europe, which was signed by the leaders of 35 states. The signatories of the Charter committed themselves to building and strengthening democracy as the only system of government in their countries; to help each other in order to make democratic gains irreversible. The Conference participants proceeded from the indivisibility of security, believing that the security of each of them is linked to the security of the others. Further development of cooperation in the field of economy and environmental protection is envisaged. We are talking about deeper integration into the international economic and financial system.

The significance of the Paris meeting is especially great for the formation of the organizational structure of the Helsinki process, for its institutionalization. The USSR was the initiator here. A mechanism has been established for regular meetings and consultations at the level of heads of state and government. The central forum for political consultation will be the Council of Foreign Ministers, to which the Committee of Experts will be attached as a subsidiary body. To serve these bodies, a Secretariat is being created in Prague. The Center for Conflict Prevention, which is being established in Vienna and is designed to monitor the military-political situation in Europe, deserves special attention. A bureau for free elections is being set up in Warsaw to facilitate the exchange of information about elections. A parliamentary assembly of the CSCE, consisting of representatives of the parliaments of all participating countries, is to be created. The Paris Conference played an important role in defining common European values and principles and set far-reaching goals for cooperation, up to and including integration. Participants have made broad security commitments. The organizational foundations of the Helsinki process were laid. All this marks the onset of a new stage in the development of the process, which reflects its vitality and significance.

Helsinki meeting, meeting on security and cooperation in Europe. It was convened at the suggestion (1965) of the socialist member states of the Warsaw Pact. It took place from July 3, 1973 to August 1, 1975. 33 European states participated in it: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Vatican, Great Britain, Hungary, East Germany, Greece, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg , Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, USSR, Turkey, Germany, Finland, France, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland, Sweden, Yugoslavia (all European countries except Albania), as well as the USA and Canada . Security issues in Europe were on the agenda; cooperation in the field of economy, science and technology and the environment; cooperation in the humanitarian and other fields; next steps after the Meeting.

The meeting was held in three stages. The first stage was held at the level of foreign ministers on July 3-7, 1973 in Helsinki. The second stage continued intermittently from 29 Aug. 1973 to 21 July 1975 in Geneva. During this period, special commissions and subcommittees for the preparation of draft documents under the general supervision of the Coordinating Committee. The third and final stage took place on July 30 - August 1. 1975 summit in Helsinki. The conference adopted the Final Act, which, despite the difference in the positions of its participants in the field of politics, economics and ideology, managed to reflect the common thing that serves to strengthen peace and security in Europe and throughout the world, and expand mutually beneficial cooperation between states. The Final Act summed up the political outcome of the 2nd World War, confirmed the inviolability of the borders established in Europe, formulated 10 fundamental principles, which should determine the rules and norms of relations between the states - participants of the Conference:

sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty; non-use of force or threat of force;
inviolability of borders; ter. the integrity of states; peaceful settlement of disputes;
non-interference in internal affairs;
respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief;
equality and the right of peoples to control their own destiny; cooperation between states;
conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law.

An agreement was reached on the preliminary notification by the participating states of each other on a voluntary and bilateral basis of major wars. exercises, the exchange of observers for the military. exercises conducted in Europe, facilitating military visits. delegations. Participating States have recognized that "they may, at their own discretion and for the purpose of promoting confidence-building, notify major movements of their troops". The Final Act defines the directions and specific forms of cooperation between European states in the field of economy, science, technology, environmental protection, as well as in the humanitarian fields (contacts between people and institutions, exchange of information, communications and cooperation in the field of culture, education, etc.). .).

The successful completion of the Meeting was prepared by the many years of struggle of the Soviets. Union, all socialist. countries, the working masses and progressive societies, forces for Europe, security. It was the event of a huge international values, an important step in consolidating the principles of peaceful coexistence, establishing relations of equal cooperation between states-you with different societies, systems.

USSR, other socialist. countries are considering Final Act X. c. not only as a result of positive developments in Europe, but also as a starting point for further progress along the path of lasting peace, the struggle for the deepening and expansion of international. cooperation. In this regard, the Belgrade meeting of representatives of the state-participants was of great importance. pan-European meeting(October 4, 1977 - March 9, 1978), on which an exchange of views was held on the implementation of the provisions of the Final Act. The final document adopted at it confirmed the determination of the participating countries to fully comply with all these provisions. At the same time, it is clear from the speeches of the US delegation at the Belgrade meeting that reaction. forces did not give up their attempts to hinder the development of the process of detente, to return the world to the times of the Cold War.

Ya. F. Chernov

Materials of the Soviet military encyclopedia. Volume 8 Tashkent - Rifle cell. 688 p., 1980.

Literature:

In the name of peace, security and cooperation. M., 1975.

History of international relations and foreign policy THE USSR. 1968-1978. M., 1979, p. 117-142;

History of diplomacy. Ed. 2nd. T. 5. Book. 2. M., 1979, p. 145-167.

$mob_info$