Breakdown of Grand Alliance 1945-46 Notes

Key Questions

1. How did events at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences lead to the breakdown of the Grand Alliance?

2. How did the death of Roosevelt contribute to the breakdown?

3. How did the USSR gain control over Eastern Europe?

3. What impact did Churchill's 'Iron Curtain Speech' have on the breakdown?

How did the Yalta and Potsdam conferences lead to the breakdown of the Grand Alliance?

1. Yalta Conference (February 1945): Cooperation with Hidden Tensions

1. The Yalta Conference brought together the Big Three - Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin - to shape the postwar world, but beneath the outward cooperation lay profound disagreements that foreshadowed the Cold War.
2. The leaders agreed to divide Germany into four occupation zones (American, British, Soviet, and French) and to establish the Allied Control Council to coordinate joint administration. This appeared to show unity, but there was already mistrust about how strictly each power would follow shared policy.
3. Stalin secured Western agreement that the USSR could take substantial reparations, partly from its own zone and partly from the West’s - an arrangement that the US and Britain later contested, believing it would destabilise Europe and strengthen Soviet influence.
4. Disputes over Poland became the clearest sign of emerging conflict.
   1. Stalin demanded recognition of the Lublin Committee, a communist-dominated provisional government.
   2. Roosevelt and Churchill insisted on free elections and inclusion of the Polish government-in-exile based in London.
   3. Stalin offered vague promises, but events on the ground—including the arrest of anti-Soviet Polish leaders—contradicted these assurances.
5. The Declaration of Liberated Europe, promising democratic freedoms and elections, was interpreted very differently:
   1. The West saw it as a commitment to pluralism,
   2. Stalin viewed it as compatible with establishing “people’s democracies” - governments dominated by communists.
6. Outcome: Although Yalta projected unity, the ambiguity of its agreements - especially regarding Eastern Europe - allowed both sides to claim legitimacy for conflicting policies. This created a climate of mistrust that rapidly deepened after the war.

2. Death of Roosevelt (April 1945): Shift in US–Soviet Relations

1. Roosevelt’s sudden death fundamentally altered the diplomatic balance within the Grand Alliance. Roosevelt believed he could manage Stalin through personal diplomacy, mutual concessions, and calm reassurance.
2. His successor, Harry Truman, lacked Roosevelt’s experience in international affairs and held much stronger anti-communist views. He entered office sceptical of Soviet intentions and unwilling to overlook Stalin’s actions in Eastern Europe.
3. Early meetings between Truman and Soviet foreign minister Molotov were tense. Truman openly criticised the USSR for failing to uphold the Yalta agreements, especially concerning Poland.
4. The US soon adopted a firmer tone:
   1. Truman demanded that Stalin allow genuinely free elections in Poland, something Stalin had no intention of permitting.
   2. US officials became increasingly alarmed by Soviet suppression of non-communist political parties across Eastern Europe.
5. Roosevelt had hoped the future United Nations would serve as a platform for cooperation, but under Truman, the US became increasingly focused on checking Soviet expansion, signalling a shift toward a more competitive relationship.
6. Roosevelt’s death removed the main advocate of cooperation and replaced him with a leader more willing to confront the USSR. This leadership change accelerated the breakdown of trust within the Grand Alliance.

3. Potsdam Conference (July–August 1945): Growing Hostility and Distrust

1. By the time of the Potsdam Conference, the wartime alliance had deteriorated significantly.
   1. Leadership changes - Truman replacing Roosevelt and Clement Attlee replacing Churchill halfway through - left only Stalin as the original member of the Big Three, and the ideological gap widened dramatically.
2. The conference addressed three major issues that sparked conflict:
   1. Germany’s future:
      1. The West wanted economic recovery and political stability, fearing a repeat of the harsh conditions after World War I.
      2. Stalin sought to keep Germany weak, extract reparations, and ensure it could never again threaten the Soviet Union.
      3. No lasting agreement was reached, and Germany soon became the central battleground of the Cold War.
   2. Reparations and economic policy:
      1. Stalin insisted on large reparations from all zones, but the US and Britain refused, fearing this would ruin Germany’s economy and enable further Soviet extraction.
      2. The lack of agreement encouraged each power to run their zone independently, undermining Allied unity.
   3. Eastern Europe:
      1. Truman demanded that Stalin honour commitments made at Yalta regarding free elections.
      2. Stalin, convinced that Soviet security required control over Eastern Europe, refused Western interference and intensified communist consolidation.
3. During the conference, the US successfully tested the atomic bomb. Truman informed Stalin only vaguely, hoping it would give the US diplomatic leverage.
   1. Stalin already knew of the project through espionage but viewed the bomb as evidence of American intimidation.
4. Outcome: Potsdam revealed irreconcilable goals. Both sides left the conference believing cooperation was no longer possible, and Germany and Eastern Europe emerged clearly as zones of future conflict.

The Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe

1. The Red Army’s Occupation of Eastern Europe (1945–46)

1. At the end of World War II, the Red Army occupied most of Eastern Europe, giving the USSR decisive military control.
2. This allowed Stalin to influence governments in Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, and parts of Czechoslovakia.
3. Western powers had no troops in these regions, meaning they could not meaningfully challenge Soviet actions.
4. Occupation ensured that political developments would unfold in ways that favoured communist dominance.

2. The Creation of Coalition Governments Under Communist Influence

1. Initially, Stalin allowed multi-party coalition governments to appear democratic and to avoid alarming the West.
2. Communists always took control of the key ministries, especially:
3. Interior (police, security forces)
4. Information (media, censorship)
5. These positions enabled communists to control political life, monitor rivals, and influence the direction of government policy.
6. By the end of 1946, coalition governments existed, but communists were already becoming the dominant force behind the scenes.

3. The Use of Secret Police, Intimidation, and Pressure

1. Soviet advisers helped establish local secret police forces modelled on the NKVD.
2. These organisations intimidated, arrested, or monitored leaders of non-communist parties.
3. Accusations of being “fascists,” “reactionaries,” or “foreign agents” were used to discredit opponents.
4. Although mass purges came later (1947–48), by 1946 the USSR had already created a climate of fear that weakened democratic opposition.

4. Early Election Manipulation and Political Pressure (1945–46)

1. Elections between 1945–46 were not yet fully rigged like those in 1947, but they were still heavily influenced by:
   1. Propaganda control
   2. Intimidation
   3. Arrests of political opponents
   4. Manipulation of voter registration
2. Examples:
   1. Poland (1946 referendum): The “3xYes” referendum was falsified to favour communist objectives.
   2. Hungary: The communists did poorly in 1945, but used police power to gradually weaken their rivals during 1946.
3. These early elections allowed the communists to claim legitimacy, while quietly preparing for a full takeover.

5. “Salami Tactics” and the Gradual Elimination of Opposition

1. Communist parties used “salami tactics” - removing opponents slice by slice rather than all at once.
2. Steps included:
   1. Splitting rival parties into factions
   2. Forcing “unity” governments that communists dominated
   3. Gradually removing influential anti-communist leaders
   4. Turning coalition partners against each other
3. By late 1946, opposition parties in many countries were already weak, divided, or infiltrated.

6. Forced Political Mergers and Growing One-Party Dominance

1. In 1946, communists began pressuring socialist or left-leaning parties into forced mergers.
   1. East Germany (1946): The Communist Party (KPD) and Socialist Party (SPD) were forced into the SED, establishing firm communist control.
2. Although full one-party states had not yet emerged everywhere, the process was well underway, and communists were positioned to dominate completely after 1946.

7. Increasing Soviet Oversight and Central Direction

1. Stalin frequently summoned Eastern European communist leaders to Moscow in 1945–46.
2. The USSR provided:
   1. Political direction
   2. Propaganda guidance
   3. Security support
   4. Economic pressure
3. Non-compliant politicians were removed, and communist leaders were encouraged to pursue full Sovietisation.

8. Media Control, Propaganda, and Limiting Opposition

1. Communists took control of:
   1. Newspapers
   2. Radio broadcasting
   3. Education ministries
2. This allowed them to portray themselves as patriots and opponents as traitors, gradually shifting public opinion.
3. By the end of 1946, freedom of expression had already disappeared in most parts of Eastern Europe.

How did Winston Churchill's Iron Curtain Speech contribute to the breakdown?

1. Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech (March 1946): Public Declaration of Division

1. Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, speaking in Fulton, Missouri with Truman present, declared that an “iron curtain” had descended across Europe, from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic.
2. Churchill argued that the USSR was imposing communist domination across Eastern Europe and that Western nations must stand united to resist further expansion.
   1. He described Europe as divided between free, democratic nations and those under Soviet control.
   2. He called for a special relationship between the UK and the US to check Soviet influence.
3. Truman’s presence signalled tacit American approval, even though the speech was not an official US policy statement.
4. Stalin reacted with hostility, accusing Churchill of trying to provoke war and comparing him to Hitler. The Soviet press launched a propaganda campaign denouncing Western aggression.
5. For many historians, the speech marked the point at which divisions became public, ending any remaining myth of the wartime alliance and signalling that both sides now viewed one another as ideological adversaries.
6. Outcome: The Iron Curtain speech crystallised the reality of the emerging Cold War. It openly framed Europe as divided into two mutually hostile blocs and increased tension by casting Soviet actions as aggressive and threatening.

2. Overall Conclusion: Why the Grand Alliance Collapsed (1945–46)

1. Ideological differences resurfaced once Nazi Germany was defeated.
2. The transition from Roosevelt to Truman hardened US policy.
3. Yalta’s vague agreements led to conflicting expectations.
4. Potsdam exposed major strategic clashes over Germany and Eastern Europe.
5. The Iron Curtain speech marked a clear public acknowledgement of the deepening divide.