The turning point in European development was the First World War. Its active participants were all European powers, as well as external forces, primarily the United States. First time in human stories she took a total and global nature. More than 60 of millions of soldiers from five continents participated in the bloody slaughter on the battlefields of Europe. The war claimed 6000 lives every day. In the meat grinder of Verdun and on the fields of death of Flanders, four times more French, three times more Belgians and twice more English than in World War II died. It was only in a grand battle on the Western Front in July 1916 that 60 000 English soldiers were killed.
The use of new slaughter species weapons Already acquired in the First World War unprecedented proportions. The German gun "Big Bertha" shot at Paris from a distance of 130 km. The American Maxim machine gun was capable of producing 600 rounds per minute. In just one attack on September 12, 1918, the Americans fired 1,1 million shells at German troops. For the first time on the battlefields Tanks and toxic substances.
The socio-political and economic upheavals, revolutions, the ill-fated Versailles Peace, the emergence of the revanchism of the vanquished, the establishment of totalitarian and dictatorial regimes in Germany, Italy and other European countries paved the way to the Second World War caused by the First World War. 31 interwar year after the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles was actually marked by the theoretical, material, diplomatic and propaganda training of the great powers to a new world conflict. According to the definition of the German historian Wöhler, the First World War marked the beginning of the “second Thirty Years War” in Europe. His famous colleague Ernst Nolte called the period in the development of Europe from 1917 to 1945 the “civil war” between national socialism and Bolshevism. In fact, not only the conflict between the two socio-political systems was characteristic of this historical period, but also the geopolitical struggle for dominance between the European powers, including Germany on the one hand and England and France on the other. The European "civil strife" was very skillfully used by the USA to increase its geopolitical and economic weight in world affairs, especially in Europe.
The Second World War, in terms of scope, intensity and severity of hostilities, in terms of the number of people participating in it, in the number of used military equipment, the tremendous loss of life and material destruction, was unmatched for all the centuries-old history of mankind. The 61 state, with a population of a billion people in 1,7, was pulled into it. 110 of millions of people were put under the gun, fighting covered the territory of 40 states. The war swallowed up enormous production resources. Only Germany, the USA, England and the USSR produced in the war years around 653 000 aircraft, 287 000 tanks, 1,041 million guns. The total cost of the war, including direct military spending and damage from material destruction, reached an astronomical figure of 4 trillion dollars. The material losses of the Soviet Union amounted to a third of its national wealth. The war claimed 50 millions of human lives, of which almost 30 million people fell to the share of the Soviet people. Such is the terrible tribute that mankind and first of all Europe were forced to pay for the global military conflict.
The Second World War ushered in a qualitatively new stage in the development of international relations, of which Hiroshima and Nagasaki became ominous symbols. From now on, the war between the great powers ceased to be a rational means of achieving political goals. The lethal means at their disposal were so advanced that they reached the limit in their development: nuclear-missile weapons appeared, the massive use of which would inevitably lead to the death of human civilization. And, nevertheless, soon after the defeat of Germany and Japan in 1945, mankind again faced the face of world war, this time cold. It did not grow into a universal “hot” only due to the fact that the fragile world kept on a bipolar “equilibrium of nuclear fear” between the United States and the Soviet Union. For the United States, secret, indirect means of struggle to undermine the state structures, the economy and the spiritual condition of the Soviet people came to the fore in the geopolitical confrontation.
One of the main causes of the Cold War was messianic communist expansion, an attack on the West’s position, launched by the Stalinist leadership after the defeat of Germany and leading to the seizure of Eastern Europe by the Soviet Union and a sharp disruption of the global and European balance of power. The Western powers were forced to adopt a policy of deterrence, and then discarding the Soviet messianic expansion. On the part of the Soviet leadership, this was a fundamentally vicious and completely unnecessary policy, which brought the country an unbearable burden of fighting the united front of the Western powers led by the United States. The expansion of the Soviet-style socialism zone and the imposition of it by force on other countries was one of the important reasons for the weakening and falling of the USSR.
So, the three world wars shook Europe to its foundations. Millions of dead, wounded, poisoned, tortured, expelled, unfortunate widows, orphaned children, hundreds of thousands of cities and villages turned into ruins, the ruthless destruction of the industrial and scientific potential of Europe, the militarization of the consciousness and life of nations, enmity, hatred, spiritual and ideological savagery, which led to totalitarianism, dictatorships, concentration camps, disintegration of morality and ethics - all these fatal phenomena accompanied the development of Europe in the past century. The intervals between the wars were used to prepare new bloody conflicts. They were constantly accompanied by the division of Europe and the creation of more and more new dividing lines between nations. The cause of all these misfortunes was the syndrome of domination, which the rulers of the European great powers alternated with. From the wars and enmities between the European powers, the United States gained enormous geopolitical benefits. They were interested in inciting these wars, provoking them and financed their preparation. Moreover, the American territory throughout the twentieth century did not suffer at all, remaining outside the combat zone.
In addition to the use of European strife and wars, the American ruling elite resorted to global financial deception, which allowed the United States to become fabulously rich at the expense of other countries and take dominant positions in the global economy. Here is how it was. After entering 1971 from the Bretton Woods international agreement concluded in 1944, which set the gold standard for financial settlements on the world market, the Federal Reserve System (FRS-FED), which serves as the central bank of the United States and is in the hands of private corporations, at its discretion, print dollars uncontrollably and in enormous quantities. According to the calculations of the Director of the German Institute for the Study of Problems of the Middle Class Prof. Homer, in 30 years, from 1971 to the beginning of 2000, the mass of goods on the world market doubled and the money supply increased 40 times, mainly as a result of a huge increase in the dollar share .
Using the printing press, the United States began to pay for oil, gas and other goods, to buy abroad all they needed to attract prominent representatives of science, technology, culture and art to the country. Moreover, they got the opportunity to put many countries of Europe and other regions of the world in vassal dependence, influence their economic development and even provoke financial crises in them, if this was beneficial for the American ruling elite. Professor Hamer wrote in this connection: “The dollar privatized by the Federal Reserve System dominates the world in quantitative terms. It accounts for more than 75% of the entire world money supply. Large financial capital forced the commodity markets it controls to sell raw materials for dollars only. Whoever wants to sell his oil is not worthless dollars, but for euros, he is declared a terrorist (Saddam). Central banks of other countries are also forced to accept large amounts (Eurobank - more than 90%) to accept dollars as a reserve currency. The remaining currencies, like the euro, base their value on more than 90% on worthless dollar bills, supported by the power and will of large US financial capital ... Thus, the latter manages, through the Reserve Federal system, cash flows and currencies from around the world . The dollar is the privately owned currency of large US financial capital. No one but him can guarantee its value, abuse it as much as possible and increase its number. The dollar serves as a tool for its world domination and a means for plundering important types of raw materials and goods on the world market. ” Unfortunately, European countries, including the Soviet Union, and then Russia, could not oppose anything to this insidious policy of the US ruling elite.
One of the major evils for Europe of the twentieth century was the split of the German nation, committed at the insistence of the Western powers, although at the Potsdam Conference the Soviet Union objected to this and advocated the preservation of a united Germany. The US was interested in “settling down” in Europe and getting its occupation zone in West Germany and turning it into a protectorate over time. As a result, Americanization of Western Europe and Sovietization of Eastern Europe took place. After May 1945, the non-European world power of the USA turned into a factor of constant military-political presence and American hegemonic influence in Europe, alien to the interests of European nations.
After the unification of Germany, which put an end to the Cold War, the era of Europeans' insight came for a short time. They suddenly realized that it was impossible to live in the old way and it was dangerous, that Europe needed a new concept of peaceful development, without dictatorship and violence from the great powers, without dividing lines and hostility. Otherwise, the final decline of Europe threatened, as Oswald Spengler predicted. The new concept of European development was embodied in the Charter of Paris, signed by representatives of the supreme power of all European countries, the USA and Canada 21 November 1990. It solemnly proclaimed: "We, the heads of state and government of the countries - participants of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, gathered in Paris during deep changes and historical expectations. The era of confrontation and division in Europe is over. We declare that our relationship in the future will be based on respect and cooperation. Europe is freed from the past. Thanks to the courage of men and women, the will of the people and the strength of the ideas of the Helsinki Final Act in Europe, a new era of democracy, peace and unity is approaching ... The time has come when the cherished hopes and expectations of our peoples come true for centuries. It is an unshakable commitment to democracy based on human rights and fundamental freedoms, a welfare achieved through economic freedom and social justice, and equal security for all our peoples. ”
What wonderful words! It seemed that before the European nations that had survived two “hot” and one “cold” war in the twentieth century, with their unimaginable horrors and losses, there were opened up bright prospects for creating a completely new Europe of peace, stability and cooperation. In fact, for the first time in the history of Europe, a pan-European consensus was reached, meeting the national interests of all European nations. But, alas, this project did not come true.
Great hopes for the pacification of Europe were associated with its economic and political integration. Shortly after World War II, the European Economic Community was formed in Western Europe, which later grew into the European Union. In the East, another integration community emerged - the CMEA. They personified two opposing economic sides in the East-West confrontation. Cooperation between them up to the 1980-s could not be considered. Very large political and economic differences lay between the two systems.
Still, the idea of European integration, due to its attractiveness, occupied the minds of many politicians and public figures. In 1970's, the concept of “Change through rapprochement” appeared in Germany. It envisaged the mitigation of the East-West confrontation and the deepening of pan-European cooperation, as a result of which democratic changes would take place in the countries of Eastern Europe. In the 1980-ies, especially with the beginning of perestroika in the USSR, a new concept, “Rapprochement through change”, aimed at the successful implementation of profound reforms in the Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries and creating favorable conditions for European integration, began to be put on the agenda. Both concepts were based on the theory of convergence, that is, the evolutionary convergence of the political and socio-economic structures of the two systems. They played a positive role in defusing tensions in Europe. In the Soviet Union, a counter-concept of a common European home arose, which was conceived to be realized during the successful restructuring. But all these good intentions did not fit into the plans of the United States.
The destruction of the Soviet Union created a completely new geopolitical situation on the European continent. The Warsaw Pact and the CMEA ceased to exist, while NATO and the EU not only survived, but also expanded at the expense of Eastern European countries. Russia, which emerged on the ruins of the Soviet Union, lost its status of a great power due to a sharp weakening of its economic potential and decline in all vital areas in the Yeltsin hard times and in the subsequent Putin-Medvedev reign. For the West, the threat from the East has disappeared. The structural differences between the two systems also began to disappear, since the new ruling regime of Russia turned the country into a capitalist path of development.
In a radically changed environment, the European Union could be the driving force of European integration. In December 2012, he was awarded the Nobel Prize. For the first time, this award was awarded not to an individual outstanding person, but to an international organization, including for its assistance to the peaceful development of Europe. The lobbyist of this award, T. Jagland, wrote in connection with this event: “What our continent has achieved is truly fantastic. From the continent of war, he became the continent of peace. "
However, such a statement was made prematurely. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, a unique opportunity arose for the American ruling elite to fulfill its dream of establishing global US domination. The principles of the Charter of Paris contradicted this, so the White House did everything so that it was thrown overboard. The United States returned to the old triad of its European policy, voiced at the beginning of 1950's by NATO Secretary General Lord Ismay: "keep Americans in Europe, keep Germans in check, keep Russians outside Europe" ("to keep Americans in, to keep Germans dawn, to keep Russians out ").
This triad continued to play a leading role in US European policy and was significantly modified. It began to look like this in practice: “To preserve and strengthen the domination of the United States in Europe, to put European countries at the service of the global interests of the United States, to weaken Russia as much as possible and to keep it away from Europe.”
The global goals of US policy were set forth in the official “New Years Project for the New American Century” (PNAC), developed by the administration of President Bush Jr. and presented with cynical frankness to the general public 3 June 1997. to ensure “America’s global leadership”, “transform the new century in the spirit of American principles and interests”, “suppress regimes that intend to harm our interests and reject our values”. To achieve these goals, it was proposed to create a military power superior to all in the spirit of "Reagan power politics." Such a policy, it was noted in the “Project”, “may be unpopular, but it is necessary if the United States wants to achieve a leading role in the world.”
The American leadership has again begun to look for benefits in splitting the European continent and maintaining a certain level of confrontation between Russia and the rest of Europe. Washington moved the inertia of the fight against the USSR to Russia. This time this struggle took on the character of a “secret war” based on the pro-American fifth column, the personification of which was Yeltsin and his entourage.
The main instrument of US domination in Europe continues to be NATO, but with new “global functions”: instead of “restraining” and “discarding” Soviet messianic communist expansion, turning NATO into an organization serving American global interests.
The constant US presence in Europe is symbolized by the deployment of large contingents of American troops and military equipment in Germany and other European countries. The question is: why is this necessary in peacetime, when no one threatens Europe? Germany remains virtually an occupied country. On its territory there are about 40 000 American soldiers. NATO continues to be a convenient tool to keep the Germans in check and force them to sail in the wake of American politics. And after the unification, Germany remains virtually a protectorate of the United States. The White House influences personnel appointments in the highest echelons of the country's power, the activities of its media. Not without his participation, nationally minded German politicians, journalists and public figures are ostracized under the pretext of non-observance of "political correctness."
Under US pressure, the government of the Federal Republic of Germany grossly violated the treaties concluded in 1990 and international law, leaving the Bundeswehr troops in the American war against Yugoslavia. This same “plot” includes a kind of task set by the Minister of Defense of Germany Struchs to the Bundeswehr: to defend Germany’s national interests in the Hindu Kush (?!). So the German troops were in Afghanistan. In fact, this action was carried out under pressure from the United States and corresponded exclusively to American interests. And this is despite the fact that the Charter of Paris, including the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, said: “Never again the threat of war must come from Europe”.
Only during the military invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration failed to impose its will on the German government of Schröder and force him to send Bundeswehr troops to that country. Too obvious there was a strong protest movement in Europe, especially in Germany, against this adventure of the Bush administration. The government of Germany could not ignore the public opinion, 84% of which, according to polls by the Allenbach Demoscopic Institute, condemned the US aggression against Iraq.
But many other European countries, primarily Eastern European countries, in which the helpful appointees of the United States came to the government, sent their military contingents to Iraq. The White House even forced Kuchma’s Ukraine to join this action. In all this, the American plans of “military globalization” of European countries were clearly manifested, that is, their submission to the interests of American global expansion.
Along with NATO, Washington managed to bring the OSCE under its control. And the European Union continues to pursue the American line in its policy towards Russia and other CIS countries. The events in Ukraine during the presidential election of 2004 showed this most clearly. Massive and arrogant EU intervention took place in the person of its chairman Solana in support of Yushchenko.
Thus, in the twentieth century, the United States achieved the Americanization of Europe. She remains split. It does not create a pan-European security and cooperation system. The interests of the ruling elite of the United States are met by the presence of international tension, conflict and crisis situations, including in the financial and economic sphere. This is vividly illustrated by the unprecedented banking crisis in Cyprus. It arose not without the influence of American financial capital and adopted an anti-Russian orientation. It cost Russia the expropriation of large offshore funds, dictated by the EU commission, placed without any opposition from the Kremlin in Cyprus by Russian oligarchs and unscrupulous entrepreneurs. Huge sums of money were lost for the development of Russian industry. The West has made a “robbery of the loot”, that is, the alienation of a part of the stolen riches of the Russian people, hidden by financial crooks in Cyprus.
The United States is clearly trying to transfer the experience of European development in the twentieth century to the twenty-first century and to maintain its dominant position on the European continent. But, as history shows irrefutably, the policy of domination inevitably ended in collapse and a national catastrophe for all its carriers. The American ruling elite did not draw the right conclusions from this obvious fact. She will not be able to avoid the same fate that befell European lovers dominate. Signs of "imperial overstrain" and a weakening of the US global role are already evident, and this trend will increase.
The time is not far off when European politicians will have to think about how to Europeanize Europe in the 21st century. Various projects are already being put forward. October 17 2012 was held in Vienna a conference on the theme “Is Europe Fatherland or Fatherland Europe?” This topic is inspired by serious structural difficulties and crisis phenomena in the development of a bureaucratized European Union, which has not yet come out of the US influence, and the search for more fruitful ways of development Of Europe. The issue of the place and role of Russia in the European concert of forces is increasingly being put on the agenda.
One of the central issues that should be resolved when creating a united and peaceful Europe was put by the most experienced European politician Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who headed the German Foreign Ministry for 18 for years and saw his task in helping to overcome the division of Germany and Europe and end the Cold War . In his speech in Berlin in the House to them. Willy Brandt 10 in November 2012 on the topic “Responsibility of the Germans to Europe”, he stressed that the most important condition for creating a new Europe is to permanently end the domination policy. Earlier, 18 in May 2012, he published in the Federal Republic of Germany an article “Not confrontation, but cooperation with Russia”. In it, he wrote: “Today it is about America, Europe and Russia to jointly define their common interests. They coincide much more than other bureaucrats from security in Brussels and the like think in Washington offices ... It is also about the attitude towards our great neighbor in the East and about using the chances of East-West cooperation. In the current situation, state wisdom is required, which means stopping confrontation and preventing the threat of a new confrontation ... And it is important that Europe fulfills the great outlines of the 1990 European Charter. All this and the solution of the big problems of our time are possible together with Russia, but in no way case not contrary to her. ”
This, in fact, is the main conclusion from the history of Europe in the twentieth century. In the 21st century, in order to survive, it needs a new philosophy of peace and cooperation, which outlaws the politics of domination and confrontation.