“Today” two, as it seems to me, fateful events took place in the life of my Motherland.
On March 5, 1946, at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill gave his famous speech, which he called the most important of his entire career, on the Iron Curtain, which effectively marked the beginning of the Cold War. I will not go into detail about the fact that by that time the 33rd US President Harry Truman’s plan “Boiler” (an attack on 22 largest cities of the USSR using nuclear weapons) was already ready, nor about the fact that Stalin still had to abandon territorial claims against Turkey.
1. The United States is at the pinnacle of world power. This is a solemn moment for American democracy.
2. We cannot close our eyes to the fact that the freedoms that citizens have in the USA, in the British Empire, do not exist in a significant number of countries, some of which are very powerful. In these countries, control over the common people is imposed from above through various kinds of police governments to such an extent that it is contrary to all principles of democracy. The only instrument capable at this historical moment of preventing war and resisting tyranny is the “fraternal association of English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States of America."
3. Before we can free ourselves from the need for national armaments for self-preservation, we must be sure that our temple is not built on quicksand or quagmire, but on a solid rocky foundation... Here I have a practical proposal for action. Courts cannot function without sheriffs and constables. The United Nations must immediately begin equipping an international military force.
Doesn't it remind you of anything from today's history?
4. However, it would be wrong and imprudent to entrust the secret information and experience of creating an atomic bomb, currently possessed by the United States, Great Britain and Canada, to a World Organization still in its infancy.
5. A shadow has fallen on the picture of the world, so recently illuminated by the victory of the Allies. No one knows what Soviet Russia and its international communist organization intend to do in the near future and what the limits, if any, are to their expansionist and religious tendencies.
6. From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain descended on the continent. On the other side of the curtain are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe - Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest, Sofia. All of these famous cities and the populations in their areas fell within what I call the Soviet sphere, all of them in one form or another subject not only to Soviet influence, but also to the significant and increasing control of Moscow. Only Athens, with its immortal glory, can freely determine its future in elections with the participation of British, American and French observers. The Polish government, under Russian domination, is encouraged to make enormous and unjust encroachments on Germany, leading to the mass expulsion of millions of Germans on a deplorable and unprecedented scale. The Communist parties, which were very small in all these states of Eastern Europe, have achieved exceptional power, far exceeding their numbers, and are everywhere seeking to establish totalitarian control. Almost all of these countries are run by police governments, and to this day, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, they have no true democracy. Turkey and Persia are deeply concerned and concerned about the claims being made against them and the pressure they are being subjected to from the Moscow government. In Berlin, the Russians are attempting to create a quasi-communist party in their zone of occupied Germany by granting special privileges to groups of left-wing German leaders.
7. After the fighting last June, the American and British armies, in accordance with an earlier agreement, withdrew to the West along a front of nearly 400 miles, to a depth in some cases of 150 miles, so that our Russian allies would occupy this vast territory, which Western democracies conquered. If the Soviet Government now tries by separate action to create a pro-Communist Germany in its zone, this will cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones and will give the defeated Germans the opportunity to bargain between the Soviets and the Western democracies. Whatever conclusions can be drawn from these facts - and these are all facts - this will clearly not be the liberated Europe for which we fought.
I wonder: for the freedom of which Europe did they fight from September '39 to June '44? But that’s not what we’re talking about now.
In general: all around, except for the “stronghold” of the United States and, of course, the United Kingdom, the darkness of communism reigns. And there is no longer any confidence that the war will not happen again: “ From what I saw in our Russian friends and comrades during the war, I conclude that there is nothing they admire more than strength, and nothing they respect less than weakness, especially military weakness. Therefore, the old doctrine of the balance of power is now unfounded».
Stalin, naturally, could not leave this message unanswered - on March 14, his speech was published in the Pravda newspaper:
“It should be noted that Mr. Churchill and his friends are strikingly reminiscent in this respect of Hitler and his friends. Hitler began the work of starting a war by proclaiming a racial theory, declaring that only people who speak the German language represent a full-fledged nation. Mr. Churchill begins the work of starting a war also with a racial theory, arguing that only nations that speak English are full-fledged nations called upon to decide the destinies of the whole world. German racial theory led Hitler and his friends to the conclusion that the Germans, as the only complete nation, should dominate other nations. The English racial theory leads Mr. Churchill and his friends to the conclusion that the nations speaking the English language, as the only full ones, should dominate the rest of the nations of the world.”
But nevertheless, Churchill's speech became fundamental to the nature and structure of international relations around the world for the next 40 years.
History, as we know, tends to repeat itself. Let us not miss the moment now to decide which side of the new curtain we will find ourselves on.
The second event that needs to be mentioned happened in 1953. On March 5 at 21:50 Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin died. 
The significance of this historical figure is difficult to assess. But for those who start raising the next bullshit, I’ll point out one point - atomic bombs did not fall on 22 cities of the Soviet Union...
Churchill gave this speech at Westminter College while visiting with US President Truman on March 5, 1946. I want to quote the most interesting part of this speech. How subtly and disgustingly Britain is again preparing a World War, while the Cold War. And how disgusting it is to reshape history just a year after the war. I'm talking about a subtle hint that Germany was defeated by the Allies, and then they let us in
"... A shadow has fallen on the picture of the world, so recently illuminated by the victory of the Allies. No one knows what Soviet Russia and its international communist organization intend to do in the near future and what the limits, if any, are to their expansionist and religious tendencies. I deeply I admire and honor the valiant Russian people and my wartime comrade Marshal Stalin.In England - I have no doubt here too - there is deep sympathy and good will for all the peoples of Russia and a determination to overcome numerous differences and breakdowns in the name of establishing lasting friendship. We understand that Russia needs to ensure the security of its western borders from a possible renewal of German aggression. We are glad to see it in its rightful place among the leading world powers. We salute its flag on the seas. And above all, we welcome the constant, frequent and strengthening ties between the Russian and our peoples on both sides of the Atlantic. However, I consider it my duty to lay before you some facts - I am sure you wish me to tell you the facts as they appear to me - about the present situation in Europe.
From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain fell across the continent. On the other side of the curtain are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe - Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest, Sofia. All of these famous cities and the populations in their areas fell within what I call the Soviet sphere, all of them in one form or another subject not only to Soviet influence, but also to the significant and increasing control of Moscow. Only Athens, with its immortal glory, can freely determine its future in elections with the participation of British, American and French observers. The Polish government, under Russian domination, is encouraged to make enormous and unjust encroachments on Germany, leading to the mass expulsion of millions of Germans on a deplorable and unprecedented scale. The Communist parties, which were very small in all these states of Eastern Europe, have achieved exceptional power, far exceeding their numbers, and are everywhere seeking to establish totalitarian control. Almost all of these countries are run by police governments, and to this day, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, they have no true democracy. Turkey and Persia are deeply concerned and concerned about the claims being made against them and the pressure they are being subjected to from the Moscow government. In Berlin, the Russians are attempting to create a quasi-communist party in their zone of occupied Germany by granting special privileges to groups of left-wing German leaders.
After the fighting last June, the American and British armies, in accordance with an earlier agreement, withdrew to the West along a front of almost 400 miles, to a depth in some cases reaching 150 miles, so that our Russian allies would occupy this vast territory that they had conquered Western democracies.
If the Soviet Government now tries by separate action to create a pro-Communist Germany in its zone, this will cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones and will give the defeated Germans the opportunity to bargain between the Soviets and the Western democracies. Whatever conclusions can be drawn from these facts - and these are all facts - this will clearly not be the liberated Europe for which we fought. And not Europe, which has the necessary prerequisites for creating a lasting peace.
The security of the world requires a new unity in Europe, from which neither side should be alienated forever. The quarrels of these powerful indigenous races in Europe resulted in the world wars that we witnessed or that broke out in former times. Twice during our lifetime the United States, against its wishes and traditions and against arguments which cannot be misunderstood, has been drawn by irresistible forces into these wars in order to secure the victory of a just cause, but only after terrible carnage and devastation. Twice the United States was forced to send millions of its young men overseas to war. But at present, war can befall any country, no matter where it is between sunset and dawn. We must, of course, act with the conscious aim of the great pacification of Europe within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. This, in my opinion, is a policy of exceptional importance.
On the other side of the Iron Curtain that has descended across Europe, there are other reasons for concern. In Italy, the activities of the Communist Party were seriously constrained by the need to support the claims of the Communist-trained Marshal Tito to former Italian territory in the center of the Adriatic. However, the situation in Italy remains uncertain. Again, it is impossible to imagine a restored Europe without a strong France. All my life I have advocated for a strong France and never, even in the darkest times, have I lost faith in its future. And now I do not lose this faith. However, in many countries around the world, far from the borders of Russia, communist fifth columns have been created, which act in complete unity and absolute obedience to the directives they receive from the communist center. With the exception of the British Commonwealth and the United States, where communism is in its infancy, the communist parties, or fifth columns, pose an ever-increasing challenge and danger to Christian civilization. All these are painful facts that have to be talked about immediately after the victory achieved by such a magnificent comradeship in arms in the name of peace and democracy. But it would be extremely unwise not to see them while there is still time. There are also concerns about prospects in the Far East, especially Manchuria. The agreement reached in Yalta, to which I was involved, was extremely favorable for Russia. But it was concluded at a time when no one could say that the war would end in the summer or fall of 1945, and when the war with Japan was expected to continue within 18 months of the end of the war with Germany. In your country you are so well informed about the Far East and are such loyal friends of China that there is no need for me to dwell on the situation there.
I felt obliged to outline to you the shadow that, both in the West and in the East, falls over the whole world. At the time of the Treaty of Versailles I was a minister and intimate friend of Mr. Lloyd George, who headed the British delegation to Versailles. I did not agree with much of what was done there, but I have a very vivid impression of the situation at that time, and it pains me to compare it with the present. These were times of great expectation and boundless confidence that there would be no more wars and that the League of Nations would become all-powerful. Today I do not see or feel such confidence and such hope in our tormented world.
On the other hand, I drive away the idea that a new war is inevitable, especially in the very near future. And precisely because I am confident that our destinies are in our hands and we are able to save the future, I consider it my duty to speak out on this issue, since I have the opportunity and opportunity to do so. I don't believe that Russia wants war. What it wants is the fruits of war and the unlimited expansion of its power and doctrines. But what we must think about here today, while there is still time, is to prevent wars forever and create conditions for freedom and democracy as quickly as possible in all countries. Our difficulties and dangers will not disappear if we turn a blind eye to them or simply wait for something to happen or pursue a policy of appeasement. We need to achieve a settlement, and the longer it takes, the more difficult it will be and the more formidable the dangers before us will become. From what I observed in the behavior of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I came to the conclusion that they respect nothing more than strength, and have no less respect for anything than military weakness. For this reason the old doctrine of the balance of power is no longer applicable. We cannot allow ourselves - as far as it is in our power - to act from a position of small advantage, which leads to the temptation to try our strength. If the Western democracies stand together in their firm commitment to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, their influence on the development of these principles will be enormous and it is unlikely that anyone will be able to shake them. If, however, they are disunited or unable to fulfill their duty, and if they miss these decisive years, then disaster will indeed befall us.
Last time, observing such a development of events, I cried out loudly to my compatriots and to the whole world, but no one wanted to listen. Until 1933 or even until 1935, Germany could have been saved from the terrible fate that befell it, and we would have been spared the misfortunes that Hitler brought upon humanity. Never in history has there been a war that could have been more easily prevented by timely action than the one that has just devastated vast areas of the globe. It, I am convinced, could have been prevented without firing a shot, and today Germany would have been a powerful, prosperous and respected country; but then they didn’t want to listen to me, and one after another we found ourselves drawn into a terrible tornado. We must not let this happen again..."
Exactly 70 years ago, on March 5, 1946, Winston Churchill delivered his famous Fulton speech. The speech of the former British prime minister served as a signal for the beginning of the Cold War, finally dividing the world into the social bloc and Western democracies.
The main theses of the Fulton speech were the need to contain the “Red threat” and create a unified armed forces. “MIR 24” recalled the key images and phrases of the Fulton speech, which for many years became the basis of the language of confrontation between the Soviet Union and Western countries.
IRON CURTAIN
“From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent. On the other side of the curtain are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe - Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest, Sofia. All of these famous cities and the populations in their areas fell within what I call the Soviet sphere, all of them in one form or another subject not only to Soviet influence, but also to the significant and increasing control of Moscow."
With this phrase, Churchill introduced into widespread use the expression “Iron Curtain,” meaning the Soviet policy of isolation. The author of this expression is the Russian philosopher Vasily Rozanov, who wrote in “Apocalypse of Our Days”:
“With a clang, a creaking, a squeal, the iron curtain falls over Russian History.
- The show is over.
The audience stood up.
- It's time to put on fur coats and return home.
We looked around.
But there were no fur coats or houses.”
This is how the outstanding thinker described the Bolsheviks’ rise to power. The theatrical metaphor is not at all accidental. In the old days, stages were equipped with sheets of iron, which were lowered in case of fire, forming a kind of curtain that protected the audience from fire.
Churchill most likely picked up this expression from the French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau. The head of government, shortly after the First World War, spoke about the need for collective defense of European countries from the threat of Bolshevism.
The phrase “iron curtain” became a common ideological cliché after the Fulton speech. It was used in both the Western and Soviet press to accuse the policy of isolation.
TEMPLE OF PEACE
Another striking detail of the Fulton speech was the expression “Temple of Peace,” which, according to Churchill, was to become the United Nations. In this part of the speech, the politician went as far as biblical quotations that are understandable to every Christian.
“We are obliged to ensure the success of this activity, so that it is real and not fictitious, so that this organization is a force capable of action and not just shaking the air, and so that it becomes a genuine Temple of Peace, in which the battle shields of many can be hung countries, and not just chopping down the world Tower of Babel. Before we can free ourselves from the necessity of national armaments for self-preservation, we must be sure that our temple is not built on quicksand or mire, but on a solid rocky foundation.”
The image of a house built on sand goes back to the famous parable from the Gospel of Matthew. “Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand; and the rain fell, and the rivers overflowed, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and he fell, and his fall was great.” And further: “The Lord is my rock and my refuge, my Savior, my God is my rock.”
A master speaker, Churchill gracefully contrasted the New Testament house with the Old Testament Tower of Babel. The image of home and family appears repeatedly throughout the speech. With this metaphor, Churchill conveys to his listeners that the Soviet Union threatens not just the political system, but the private life of all citizens.
FIFTH COLUMN
As you know, the term “fifth column” arose during the Spanish Civil War. During the war, this was the name given to intelligence officers who collaborated with the Nazi regime.
Churchill also resorted to it in his Fulton speech, essentially equating the Bolshevik regime with the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.
“In many countries around the world, far from the borders of Russia, communist fifth columns have been created, which act in complete unity and absolute submission to the directives they receive from the communist center. With the exception of the British Commonwealth and the United States, where communism is in its infancy, the communist parties, or fifth columns, represent an ever-increasing challenge and danger to Christian civilization."
During the Cold War, the expression “fifth column” became popular among journalists and became an ideological cliché. In recent years it has regained its foothold in the press.
POSITION OF SMALL ADVANCE
“From what I observed in the behavior of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I came to the conclusion that they respect nothing more than strength, and have no less respect for anything than military weakness. For this reason the old doctrine of the balance of power is no longer applicable. We cannot allow ourselves - as far as it is in our power - to act from a position of small advantage, which leads to the temptation to try our strength.
This is how Churchill characterized the position of the West in a bipolar world. This was one of the main points of the Fulton speech, which directly called on the capitalist English-speaking countries to unite military power.
The former British prime minister came up with the idea of creating UN troops that would participate in resolving armed conflicts. Churchill can also be called indirectly involved in the creation of the North Atlantic Alliance and the European Union.
This part of the speech was particularly harshly criticized in the Soviet Union. The call for the unification of the English-speaking world in Moscow was called racism, and the idea of creating an international army was called a manifestation of militarism.
In addition, during his speech, Churchill especially emphasized the term “Western democracies,” strongly contrasting them with the “totalitarian East.”
THE SHADOW FALLED OVER THE WORLD
“A shadow has fallen on the picture of the world, so recently illuminated by the victory of the Allies. No one knows what Soviet Russia and its international communist organization intend to do in the near future and what the limits, if any, are to their expansionist and religious tendencies."
Churchill predicted the expansion of the socialist camp, but softened his speech with a tribute to Soviet soldiers. This did not help - a few days later a response signed by Joseph Stalin was published in Pravda.
The Soviet leader called Churchill a “warmonger” who was no different from Hitler. Stalin also justified Soviet expansion on the grounds that Moscow had more rights to influence post-war Europe due to the numerous losses suffered in the fight against fascism.
After this, it became clear that war between the Soviet Union and the West could not be avoided. All that remained was to understand in what form it would be carried out.
Eduard Lukoyanov
"Fulton Speech"
The Fulton Speech, a speech delivered on March 5, 1946 by Winston Churchill at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, USA, is considered to be the impetus for the start of the Cold War. At the time of his speech, Churchill was not, contrary to popular belief, the Prime Minister of Great Britain (after the defeat of the Conservative Party in the elections on July 5, 1945, he was the leader of the opposition) and was not in the United States on an official visit, but as a private citizen, as a vacationer.
At the beginning of the Fulton speech, Churchill stated that from now on “the United States is at the pinnacle of world power,” and the second part was devoted to an analysis of the situation in Europe and Asia. He openly named the Soviet Union as the cause of "international difficulties." The danger of communism, Churchill declared, was growing everywhere “except in the British Commonwealth and the United States, where communism is still in its infancy.” He expressed the idea that “in a large number of countries far from the borders of Russia, communist “fifth columns” have been created throughout the world, which work in complete unity and absolute obedience in carrying out the directives received from the communist center.”
During his speech, written and read with Churchill’s characteristic brilliance, he actively used memorable images and pithy expressions - “the iron curtain” and its “shadow falling on the continent”, “fifth columns” and “police states”, “total obedience” and “unconditional expansion of power”, etc. It is interesting that the former (and future) Prime Minister of Great Britain used the words “Britain” and “Great Britain” only once each. But “British Commonwealth and Empire” - six times, “English-speaking peoples” - six times, “related” - eight times, which was emphasized, since the question in the Fulton speech was raised not about the national interests of England, but about the interests of the entire English-speaking world.
Excerpts from the speech:
"A shadow has fallen on the picture of the world, so recently illuminated by the victory of the Allies. No one knows what Soviet Russia and its international communist organization intend to do in the near future and what are the limits, if any, to their expansionist and religious tendencies. I deeply admire and honor the valiant Russian people and my wartime comrade Marshal Stalin. In England - I have no doubt here too - there is deep sympathy and good will for all the peoples of Russia and a determination to overcome numerous differences and breakdowns in the name of establishing lasting friendship. We understand, that Russia needs to ensure the security of its western borders from a possible renewal of German aggression. We are glad to see it in its rightful place among the leading world powers. We salute its flag on the seas. And above all, we welcome the constant, frequent and strengthening ties between the Russian and our peoples on both sides of the Atlantic. However, I consider it my duty to lay before you some facts—I am sure you would like me to tell you the facts as they appear to me—about the present situation in Europe."
"...Almost all of these countries are run by police governments, and to this day, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, there is no true democracy in them. Turkey and Persia are deeply worried and concerned about the claims made against them and the pressure to which they are subjected by the Moscow government. In Berlin, the Russians are attempting to create a quasi-communist party in their zone of occupied Germany by granting special privileges to groups of left-wing German leaders."
“If the Soviet government now tries to create a pro-communist Germany in its zone by separate actions, this will cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones and will give the defeated Germans the opportunity to bargain between the Soviets and Western democracies. Whatever conclusions can be drawn from these facts, that’s all These are the facts - this will clearly not be the liberated Europe for which we fought. And not a Europe that has the necessary prerequisites for creating a lasting peace."
"Cold War"
The Cold War is a global geopolitical, military, economic and ideological confrontation between the USSR and its allies, on the one hand, and the United States and its allies, on the other. This confrontation was not a war in the international legal sense. One of the main components of the confrontation was the ideological struggle - as a consequence of the contradiction between the capitalist and what was called socialist models in the USSR.
The internal logic of the confrontation required the parties to participate in conflicts and interfere in the development of events in any part of the world. The efforts of the USA and the USSR were aimed primarily at dominance in the political sphere. The USA and the USSR created their spheres of influence, securing them with military-political blocs - NATO and the Warsaw Department. Although the United States and the USSR did not officially enter into direct military conflict, their competition for influence led to the outbreak of local armed conflicts in various parts of the Third World, usually proceeding as proxy wars between the two superpowers.
The Cold War was accompanied by a conventional and nuclear arms race that at times threatened to lead to a third world war. The most famous of such cases when the world found itself on the brink of disaster was the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
The policy of perestroika announced by Mikhail Gorbachev, who came to power in the USSR in 1985, led to the loss of the leading role of the CPSU. The USSR, burdened by an economic crisis, as well as social and interethnic problems, collapsed in December 1991, which put an end to the Cold War.
In Eastern Europe, communist governments, having lost Soviet support, were removed even earlier, in 1989-1990. The Warsaw Pact officially ended on July 1, 1991, and the Allied authorities lost power as a result of the events of August 19-21, 1991.
I am happy to have arrived at Westminster College today and to have been awarded my degree by you. The name "Westminster" says something to me. I think I heard it somewhere. After all, it was at Westminster that I received the lion's share of my education in the field of politics, dialectics, rhetoric, and something else. In essence, you and I were educated in the same or similar educational institutions.
It is also an honor, perhaps almost unique, for a private citizen to be introduced to an academic audience by the President of the United States. Burdened with many different concerns and responsibilities, which he does not crave, but from which he does not run, the President has traveled 1000 miles in order to honor our meeting today with his presence and emphasize its significance, giving me the opportunity to address this kindred country, my compatriots on the other side of the ocean, and maybe also to some other countries.
The President has already told you his desire, which I am sure coincides with yours, that I should be completely free to give you my honest and faithful advice in these troubled and troubled times.
I will, of course, take advantage of this freedom given to me and feel all the more entitled to do so since whatever personal ambitions I may have had in my younger years have long been satisfied beyond my greatest dreams.
I must, however, make it clear that I have neither official assignment nor status for this kind of speech, and I speak only on my own behalf. So what you see is only what you see.
Therefore, I can take the liberty of reflecting on the experiences of the life I have lived to reflect on the problems that beset us immediately after our complete victory on the battlefields, and try to do my best to ensure the preservation of what was gained with such sacrifice and suffering for the sake of the future glory and security of humanity.
The United States is currently at the pinnacle of global power. Today is a solemn moment for American democracy, for along with its superior power it has accepted an incredible responsibility to the future.
As you look around, you should feel not only a sense of accomplishment, but also concern that you may not be up to par with what is expected of you. The opportunity is there, and it is completely clear to both our countries. To reject them, ignore them, or squander them uselessly would be to incur endless reproaches of future times.
Constancy of thought, perseverance in achieving the goal and great simplicity of decisions should guide and determine the behavior of the English-speaking countries in time of peace, as it did in time of war. We must and, I think, can rise to the occasion of this strict requirement.
When the US military is faced with a serious situation, it usually prefaces its directives with the words "overall strategic concept." There is wisdom in this because having such a concept leads to clarity of thinking.
The general strategic concept that we must adhere to today is nothing less than the security and well-being, freedom and progress of all families, all people in all countries.
I refer primarily to the millions of cottages and tenement houses whose inhabitants, despite the vicissitudes and difficulties of life, strive to protect their households from hardship and to raise their families in the fear of the Lord or based on ethical principles, which often play an important role.
To ensure the safety of these countless dwellings, they must be protected from two main evils - war and tyranny.
Everyone knows the terrible shock experienced by any family when the curse of war falls on its breadwinner, who works for her and overcomes the hardships of life.
The terrible destruction of Europe with all its former values and a large part of Asia yawns before our eyes.
When the intentions of malicious people or the aggressive aspirations of powerful powers destroy the foundations of civilized society in many parts of the world, ordinary people are faced with difficulties that they cannot cope with. For them, everything is distorted, broken, or completely ground into powder.
Standing here on this quiet day, I shudder to think about what is happening in real life to millions of people and what will happen to them when famine hits the planet. No one can calculate what is called “the incalculable sum of human suffering.” Our main task and responsibility is to protect the families of ordinary people from the horrors and misfortunes of another war.
We all agree on this.
Our American military colleagues, after they have defined the “overall strategic concept” and calculated all available resources, always move on to the next stage - the search for means of its implementation.
There is also general agreement on this issue. A world organization has already been formed with the fundamental goal of preventing war. The UN, the successor to the League of Nations with the crucial addition of the United States and all that means, has already begun its work. We must ensure the success of this activity, so that it is real and not fictitious, so that this organization is a force capable of action and not just shaking the air, and so that it becomes a genuine Temple of Peace, in which the battle shields of many countries can be hung , and not just chopping down the world's Tower of Babel.
Before we can free ourselves from the necessity of national armaments for self-preservation, we must be sure that our temple is not built on quicksand or mire, but on a solid rocky foundation. All who have their eyes open know that our journey will be difficult and long, but if we firmly follow the course that we followed during the two world wars (and, unfortunately, did not follow in between), then I have there is no doubt that in the end we will be able to achieve our common goal.
Here I also have a practical proposal for action. Courts cannot function without sheriffs and constables. The United Nations must immediately begin equipping an international military force. In such a matter we can only advance gradually, but we must start now.
I propose that all States be invited to place at the disposal of the World Organization a number of air force squadrons. These squadrons would be trained in their own countries, but would be transferred on a rotating basis from one country to another.
The pilots would wear the military uniform of their countries, but with different insignia. They could not be required to take part in hostilities against their own country, but in all other respects they would be directed by the World Organization.
Such forces could begin at a modest level and be built upon as confidence grows. I wanted this done after the First World War and I truly believe it can be done now.
However, it would be wrong and imprudent to trust the secret information and experience of creating an atomic bomb, currently possessed by the United States, Great Britain and Canada, to a World Organization still in its infancy.
It would be criminal madness to let these weapons go adrift in a world still in turmoil and ununited. Not a single person in any country has slept worse because the information, means and raw materials for creating this bomb are now concentrated mainly in American hands.
I don’t think we would be sleeping so peacefully now if the situation were reversed and some communist or neo-fascist state monopolized this terrible remedy for some time. The mere fear of it would be enough for totalitarian systems to impose themselves on the free democratic world.
The horrific consequences of this would be beyond human imagination. The Lord has commanded that this should not happen, and we still have time to put our house in order before such a danger arises.
But even if we spare no effort, we would still have to have a superiority sufficiently striking to have an effective deterrent against its use or the threat of such use by other countries. Ultimately, when the true brotherhood of man would be actually realized in the form of some World Organization, which would have all the necessary practical means to make it effective, such powers could be transferred to it.
Now I come to the second danger that awaits families and ordinary people, namely, tyranny. We cannot close our eyes to the fact that the freedoms enjoyed by citizens throughout the British Empire do not apply in a significant number of countries; some of them are quite powerful.
In these states, power is imposed on the common people by pervasive police governments. The power of the state is exercised without limitation by dictators or closely knit oligarchies that rule with the help of a privileged party and political police.
At the present time, when difficulties are still so many, it cannot be our duty to interfere forcibly in the internal affairs of countries with which we are not at war.
We must unceasingly and fearlessly proclaim the great principles of liberty and human rights which are the common heritage of the English-speaking world and which, in the development of the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the law of Habeas Corpus, the trial by jury and the English common law, found their most famous expression in the Declaration of Independence.
They mean that the people of any country have the right and ought to be able, by constitutional action, by free unfalsified elections by secret ballot, to choose or change the character or form of government under which they live; that freedom of speech and press should prevail; that the courts, independent of the executive power, and not subject to the influence of any party, should give effect to laws which have received the approval of a large majority of the people, or have been sanctified by time or custom.
These are fundamental freedom rights that every home should know. This is the message of the British and American people to all humanity. Let us preach what we do and practice what we preach.
So, I have identified two main dangers threatening people's families. I did not talk about poverty and deprivation, which often worry people the most. But if the dangers of war and tyranny are eliminated, then, undoubtedly, science and cooperation in the next few years, at most a few decades, will bring to the world, which has gone through the cruel school of war, an increase in material well-being unprecedented in the history of mankind.
At present, in this sad and numbing moment, we are oppressed by hunger and despondency that have come after our colossal struggle. But this will all pass, and perhaps quickly, and there are no reasons, other than human stupidity and inhuman crime, that would prevent all countries, without exception, from taking advantage of the advent of an age of abundance.
I often quote words that I heard fifty years ago from the great Irish-American speaker and friend Burke Cochrane:
“There is enough for everyone. The earth is a generous mother. She will provide complete abundance of food for all her children, if only they will cultivate it in justice and peace.”
So, so far we are in complete agreement.
Now, continuing to use the methodology of our general strategic concept, I come to the main thing I wanted to say here. Neither the effective prevention of war nor the permanent expansion of the influence of the World Organization can be achieved without the fraternal union of the English-speaking peoples.
This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and the British Empire and the United States.
We have no time for platitudes, and I dare to speak specifically.
Fraternal union requires not only the growth of friendship and mutual understanding between our sister systems of society, but also the continuation of close ties between our militaries, which should lead to the joint study of potential dangers, the compatibility of weapons and military regulations, and the exchange of officers and cadets of military technical colleges.
It would also mean the continued use of existing capabilities to ensure mutual security through the shared use of all naval and air force bases.
This would possibly double the mobility of the US navy and air force. This would greatly increase the mobility of the British Empire's armed forces and, as the world calmed down, provide significant financial savings. We already share a number of islands; in the near future, other islands may come into joint use. The US already has a permanent defense agreement with the Dominion of Canada, which is deeply loyal to the British Commonwealth and Empire.
This agreement is more powerful than many of those often negotiated within formal alliances. This principle should be extended to all countries of the British Commonwealth with full reciprocity. This way and only this way we can, no matter what happens, protect ourselves and work together in the name of high and simple goals that are dear to us and not harmful to anyone.
At the very last stage, the idea of common citizenship can be realized (and, I believe, will ultimately be realized), but we can easily leave this question to the discretion of fate, whose hand extended towards us so many of us already clearly see.
There is, however, one important question we must ask ourselves. Would a special relationship between the United States and the British Commonwealth be compatible with a fundamental allegiance to the World Organization?
My answer: such a relationship, on the contrary, is probably the only means by which this organization can gain status and power.
Special relations already exist between the United States and Canada and the South American republics. We also have a 20-year agreement on cooperation and mutual assistance with Russia.
I agree with the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Bevin, that this treaty, to the extent that it depends on us, can be concluded for 50 years. Our only goal is mutual assistance and cooperation. Our alliance with Portugal produced fruitful results at critical moments of the last war.
None of these agreements conflict with the general interests of the world agreement. On the contrary, they can help the work of the World Organization.
“There is room for everyone in the house of the Lord.” A special relationship between the United Nations, which is not aggressive against any country and does not carry within it plans incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, is not only not harmful, but useful and, I believe, necessary.
I have already spoken about the Temple of Peace. Workers from all countries must build this Temple.
If two of these builders know each other especially well and are old friends, if their families are mixed and, to quote the clever words that caught my eye the day before yesterday, “if they have faith in each other’s goals, hope for each other’s future and forbearance to each other's shortcomings," then why can't they work together towards a common goal as friends and partners?
Why can’t they share tools and thus increase each other’s ability to work? They not only can, but must do this, otherwise the Temple will not be built or will collapse after construction by mediocre students, and we will again, for the third time, study in the school of war, which will be incomparably more cruel than the one from which we just left.
The times of the Middle Ages may return, and on the sparkling wings of science the Stone Age may return, and what can now be showered on humanity with immeasurable material benefits may lead to its complete destruction.
I therefore appeal: be vigilant. Perhaps there is little time left. Let's not let things happen until it's too late. If we want that fraternal union of which I have just spoken, with all the additional strength and security which both our countries can derive from it, let us make this great cause known everywhere and play its part in strengthening the foundations of peace.
It is better to prevent a disease than to treat it.
A shadow has fallen on the picture of the world, so recently illuminated by the victory of the Allies. No one knows what Soviet Russia and its international communist organization intend to do in the near future and what the limits, if any, are to their expansionist and religious tendencies.
I deeply admire and honor the valiant Russian people and my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin.
In England - and I have no doubt here too - there is deep sympathy and good will for all the peoples of Russia and a determination to overcome numerous differences and breakdowns in the name of establishing lasting friendship.
We understand that Russia needs to ensure the security of its western borders from a possible resumption of German aggression. We are glad to see it in its rightful place among the world's leading powers. We salute her flag on the seas. And above all, we welcome the constant, frequent and strengthening ties between the Russian and our peoples on both sides of the Atlantic.
However, I consider it my duty to state to you some facts—I am sure that you wish me to state to you the facts as they appear to me—about the present situation in Europe.
From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain fell across the continent. On the other side of the curtain are all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe - Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest, Sofia.
All of these famous cities and the populations in their areas fell within what I call the Soviet sphere, all of them in one form or another subject not only to Soviet influence, but also to the significant and increasing control of Moscow.
Only Athens, with its immortal glory, can freely determine its future in elections with the participation of British, American and French observers.
The Polish government, under Russian domination, is encouraged to make enormous and unjust encroachments on Germany, leading to the mass expulsion of millions of Germans on a deplorable and unprecedented scale.
The Communist parties, which were very small in all these states of Eastern Europe, have achieved exceptional power, far exceeding their numbers, and are everywhere seeking to establish totalitarian control.
Almost all of these countries are run by police governments, and to this day, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, they have no true democracy. Turkey and Persia are deeply concerned and concerned about the claims being made against them and the pressure they are being subjected to from the Moscow government.
In Berlin, the Russians are attempting to create a quasi-communist party in their zone of occupied Germany by granting special privileges to groups of left-wing German leaders.
After the fighting last June, the American and British armies, in accordance with an earlier agreement, withdrew to the West along a front of almost 400 miles, to a depth in some cases reaching 150 miles, so that our Russian allies would occupy this vast territory that they had conquered Western democracies.
If the Soviet Government now tries by separate action to create a pro-Communist Germany in its zone, this will cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones and will give the defeated Germans the opportunity to bargain between the Soviets and the Western democracies.
Whatever conclusions can be drawn from these facts - and these are all facts - this will clearly not be the liberated Europe for which we fought. And not Europe, which has the necessary prerequisites for creating a lasting peace.
The security of the world requires a new unity in Europe, from which neither side should be alienated forever. The quarrels of these powerful indigenous races in Europe resulted in the world wars that we witnessed or that broke out in former times.
Twice during our lifetime the United States, against its wishes and traditions and against arguments which cannot be misunderstood, has been drawn by irresistible forces into these wars in order to secure the victory of a just cause, but only after terrible carnage and devastation. Twice the United States was forced to send millions of its young men overseas to war.
But at present, war can befall any country, no matter where it is between sunset and dawn. We must, of course, act with the conscious aim of the great pacification of Europe within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. This, in my opinion, is a policy of exceptional importance.
On the other side of the Iron Curtain that has descended across Europe, there are other reasons for concern. In Italy, the activities of the Communist Party were seriously constrained by the need to support the claims of the Communist-trained Marshal Tito to former Italian territory in the center of the Adriatic. However, the situation in Italy remains uncertain. Again, it is impossible to imagine a restored Europe without a strong France.
All my life I have advocated for a strong France and never, even in the darkest times, have I lost faith in its future. And now I do not lose this faith. However, in many countries around the world, far from the borders of Russia, communist fifth columns have been created, which act in complete unity and absolute obedience to the directives they receive from the communist center.
With the exception of the British Commonwealth and the United States, where communism is in its infancy, the communist parties, or fifth columns, pose an ever-increasing challenge and danger to Christian civilization.
All these are painful facts that have to be talked about immediately after the victory achieved by such a magnificent comradeship in arms in the name of peace and democracy. But it would be extremely unwise not to see them while there is still time.
There are also concerns about prospects in the Far East, especially Manchuria. The agreement reached in Yalta, to which I was involved, was extremely favorable for Russia. But it was concluded at a time when no one could say that the war would end in the summer or fall of 1945, and when the war with Japan was expected to continue within 18 months of the end of the war with Germany.
In your country you are so well informed about the Far East and are such loyal friends of China that there is no need for me to dwell on the situation there.
I felt obliged to outline to you the shadow that, both in the West and in the East, falls over the whole world. At the time of the Treaty of Versailles I was a minister and intimate friend of Mr. Lloyd George, who headed the British delegation to Versailles.
I did not agree with much of what was done there, but I have a very vivid impression of the situation at that time, and it pains me to compare it with the present. These were times of great expectation and boundless confidence that there would be no more wars and that the League of Nations would become all-powerful. Today I do not see or feel such confidence and such hope in our tormented world.
On the other hand, I drive away the idea that a new war is inevitable, especially in the very near future. And precisely because I am confident that our destinies are in our hands and we are able to save the future, I consider it my duty to speak out on this issue, since I have the opportunity and opportunity to do so.
I don't believe that Russia wants war. What it wants is the fruits of war and the unlimited expansion of its power and doctrines. But what we must think about here today, while there is still time, is to prevent wars forever and create conditions for freedom and democracy as quickly as possible in all countries.
Our difficulties and dangers will not disappear if we turn a blind eye to them or simply wait for something to happen or pursue a policy of appeasement. We need to achieve a settlement, and the longer it takes, the more difficult it will be and the more formidable the dangers before us will become. From what I observed in the behavior of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I came to the conclusion that they respect nothing more than strength, and have no less respect for anything than military weakness.
For this reason the old doctrine of the balance of power is no longer applicable.
We cannot allow ourselves - as far as it is in our power - to act from a position of small advantage, which leads to the temptation to try our strength. If the Western democracies stand together in their firm commitment to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, their influence on the development of these principles will be enormous and it is unlikely that anyone will be able to shake them. If, however, they are disunited or unable to fulfill their duty, and if they miss these decisive years, then disaster will indeed befall us.
Last time, observing such a development of events, I cried out loudly to my compatriots and to the whole world, but no one wanted to listen. Until 1933 or even until 1935, Germany could have been saved from the terrible fate that befell it, and we would have been spared the misfortunes that Hitler brought upon humanity.
Never in history has there been a war that could have been more easily prevented by timely action than the one that has just devastated vast areas of the globe. It, I am convinced, could have been prevented without firing a shot, and today Germany would have been a powerful, prosperous and respected country; but then they didn’t want to listen to me, and one after another we found ourselves drawn into a terrible tornado.
We must not allow this to happen again.
Now this can only be achieved by achieving today, in 1946, a good understanding with Russia on all issues under the general auspices of the United Nations, maintaining through this world instrument this good understanding for many years, drawing on the full power of the English-speaking world and all those who is associated with him.
Let no one underestimate the formidable power of the British Empire and Commonwealth.
May you see 46 million people on our island who are food insecure, and may we have difficulty rebuilding our industry and export trade after six years of desperate war effort; do not think that we cannot pass through this dark period of hardship as we passed through the glorious years of suffering, or that in half a century there will not be 70 or 80 million of us living throughout the world and united in the defense of our traditions, our image life and those universal values that you and I profess.
If the people of the British Commonwealth and the United States act together, for all that such cooperation means in the air, at sea, in science and economics, then that turbulent, unstable balance of power which would tempt ambition or adventurism will be eliminated.
On the contrary, there will be complete confidence in safety.
If we faithfully observe the Charter of the United Nations, and move forward with calm and sober strength, without laying claim to foreign lands and wealth, and without seeking to establish arbitrary control over the thoughts of men, if all the moral and material forces of Britain unite with yours in fraternal union, then Wide paths to the future will open - not only for us, but for everyone, not only for our time, but also for the century ahead.
Reviews
At one time, a teacher at the Institute of Foreign Languages, Vilen Naumovich Komissarov, told us, his then listeners, that Churchill’s Fulton speech was very difficult to adequately translate due to the specificity of the expressions used by this figure. Indeed, his speech is in the style of a 19th century Anglican preacher. and is replete with abstract concepts and archaic expressions. The meaning of the speech, however, is quite clear: the threat from Nazi Germany has passed, and another, communist threat hangs over the “English-speaking” peoples, to repel which the entire English-speaking world must unite.
The presented text is similar to a simple reproduction of the translation performed by a simultaneous interpreter. There are no visible traces of any literary processing of this text. There are various formal omissions, such as words like "ladies and gentlemen" or "Mr. President" to refer to the President of the United States or the head of Westminster College. In the initial paragraph, the translation of the text is slightly different from the English text posted, for example, on the site http://britannia.com/history/docs/sinews1.html. Thus, Churchill says that he is flattered that the degree is awarded to him “from an institution whose reputation has been so solidly established” - this is not in the translation.
Some notes on translation:
In these states, power is imposed on the common people by pervasive police governments...
In the original, it’s more like “control is being established over people...” and Churchill’s phrase that this control is being established to a degree which is overwhelming and contrary to every principle of democracy is not translated at all
Into the internal affairs of countries with which we are not at war
in the original it is more likely “countries over which we did not win in the war or which we did not defeat in the war (literally “we did not conquer”)”
In Russian, “Magna Carta”, not just Magna Carta; omitted from the Declaration of Independence - USA
The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.
