Given the instability in the post-war Europe, agreements pledged during the Conference and the developed tool for agreeing on policies both between the governments of the three participating countries of the Yalta Conference and at the international level, for almost half a century helped avoid a new large-scale military conflict on the European continent and in the world, while at the same time building up international security. This unqualified success was enabled by the joint decision on the establishment, with the active participation of the anti-Hitler coalition allies, of an international organization to maintain peace and security, the foundations of which were laid at the Yalta Conference, and in April, 1945, in San Francisco, where the UN Charter was drafted. As stated in the decision of the Yalta Conference, this move was “a significant milestone for the maintenance of peace and security, as well as for the prevention of aggression and the removal of political, economic, and social causes of war through the close and continuing collaboration of all peace-loving nations.”
And today, the relevance and importance for the international community of the decisions adopted at the Yalta Conference are confirmed by the following provision:
…Only with continuing and growing cooperation and understanding between our three countries and among all peace-loving peoples can the highest aspiration of humanity be achieved – a durable and lasting peace, which must, as discussed in the Atlantic Charter “provide a situation in which all people in all countries can live their entire lives without knowing fear or need…”
Now, 70 years have passed since this important event in the world history. The world has changed dramatically over these years, the bloc of countries opposed to the capitalist lifestyle and striving to build socialism on their own soil has disappeared. The Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union have disbanded, there have been radical changes in the structure of European countries: some of them have split (sometimes not without external influence), unification processes within the EU have occurred. The political forces of several European countries, acting on the principle of “unity around force”, took a course of unquestioning submission to Washington, neglecting their own national interests, not only in matters of policy, but also in economy and social programs to support their populations, which naturally caused a negative reaction and anti-government activity among the population of many European countries.
However, the results of all these changes on the European continent will be decided not by the rhetoric and speeches of some politicians, but by history, which is still eying current events, which sometimes leave very significant wounds on its face.
Of course, these injuries should include attempts by certain political forces and their sponsors to rock the boat of European security, encouraging the revival of Nazi sentiments in Ukraine and other countries. Some examples are the torchlight procession that took place without any reaction in the West on January 1 in Kiev to commemorate the birthday of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, the glorification of Nazi war criminals in Ukraine and certain Baltic countries, and the rewriting by nouveau Ukrainian Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, with the explicit encouragement of Washington and Europe, of the history of World War II where Hitler’s Germany is viewed not as an internationally recognized aggressor but a “victim”! The most amazing thing about this is that these facts remain unnoticed by the “democratic European Union”, which only recently healed from the wounds of Nazi aggression, and among the leaders of the “new Europe”, with the sole exception, perhaps, of Czech President Milos Zeman and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, there was no one able to openly confront the renewed ideological opposition. Particularly surprising is the silent position of German Chancellor Angela Merkel on this issue, who not only actively supported the junta last year in Kiev, but also has close personal contacts with Yatsenyuk, and after his “triumphant visit” to Germany, even approved the release of new “aid” to Kiev in the amount of 500 million euros. – Is this to strengthen the “Bandera ideological component of Kiev’s rulers”?
Other very important destabilizing factors today are also the manifestations of terrorism, religious extremism, racism, and blatant disregard of the international law. As a result of attempts by individual governments and, above all, the United States, to arrogate to themselves the unique right to dispose of the lives and destinies of people on the planet, open military aggression became a possibility, sometimes based on artificially fabricated reasons (such was, in particular, the case with Iraq, Libya, and numerous other countries). Such disregard for international law, the many years of bloodshed of innocent civilians in the Middle East, Afghanistan and other parts of the world, invokes a natural response and a new iniquity, manifesting in particular in the activities of the “Islamic state”, whose ideas were very popular among the opponents of Western politics, living not only in the East, but also in Europe itself and the United States. Under these circumstances and because of the inability of international influence independent from Washington to stop the military aggression of strong states, there has been a growth of terrorist activity, more strongly grasping Europe, as confirmed by recent events in France.
The accelerating pace of life in the last decades, the development of technologies, especially military ones, also have an impact on the events now rapidly unfolding in many countries. There is a growing opposition not only in individual countries but also in regional conflicts, into which third countries are being drawn with ever increasing frequency. Economic crises are having a stronger influence on the social life and the politics of states sometimes pushed to the inappropriate use of weapons, from which innocent civilians suffer and die.
On the other hand, social inequality is growing not only within many countries, but also among an increasing number of countries, as people in poor regions in the ever-quickening flow of illegal migration leave their place of residence en masse and become participants in new international, interfaith, inter-ethnic conflicts.
It seems that in its complexity today’s world can hardly be considered simpler and better than in the era of 1945, when truly great powers and their rulers made the decision to hold the Yalta Conference to fight the common threat hanging over the world and develop concerted action to overcome the crisis.
In 1945, the world’s leading politicians were intelligent enough and had the desire to hold such a conference. But what now? – Are there no such politicians, or are the world’s current problems no big deal? After all, the Livadia Palace in Yalta is free for such a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has repeatedly invited his colleagues from the US and Europe to sit down for a detailed discussion of all urgent problems. So will we soon witness such a meeting, or will the personal ambitions of individual politicians prove themselves stronger than the world’s problems?
Vladimir Odintsov, political commentator, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
