Phenomenon called outstanding phenomenon or an outstanding person. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 32 President of the United States of America, turned out to be a phenomenon in both senses. He was also an outstanding, in fact, a unique phenomenon of American history, and one of its most prominent figures.
Moreover, the uniqueness of the FDR phenomenon for our country lies in the fact that he was perhaps the only US president who sincerely, though not immediately, realized the positive significance of a powerful Russia not only for world political life, but also for the USA. Late F. Roosevelt rose - or was able to rise - to a broad, truly responsible level of responsibility of the head of a superpower, understanding the essence of the civilizational process. This process has the potential for equal global cooperation of large and small nations, and it is precisely the FDR that could, in cooperation with the Soviet Union, realize it, stimulating the peaceful coexistence of two rival social systems.
It is believed that in the course of personal contacts F. Roosevelt was often inferior to the pressure of I. Stalin, while Winston Churchill was unyielding.
However, an analysis of the transcripts of the talks in Tehran and Yalta, and the correspondence of the “Big Three” show: Roosevelt agreed with the Soviet leader only when Stalin’s position was logically substantiated logically and substantively supported.
Moreover, I. Stalin was, as they say, a tough nut. So, F. Roosevelt agreed that the Kuril Islands will be returned to Russia. And so, after the death of the 32nd US president, after the atomic bombings of Japan, his successor Harry Truman very strictly informs Stalin that “the United States government wants to have aviation bases for land and sea aircraft on one of the Kuril Islands for military and commercial purposes. "
J. Stalin replies from August 22 of August 1945, noting that, first, “such an event was not envisaged by the decision of the three powers neither in the Crimea, nor in Berlin”. Secondly, “demands of this kind are usually made either to a conquered state or to such a union state that is not able to defend this or that part of its territory itself,” and that he, Stalin, does not think that “the Soviet Union can be counted as such states. "
Finally, I. Stalin writes, since the message of the US President “does not set forth any reasons for the requirement to provide a permanent base, I must say sincerely that neither I nor my colleagues understand the circumstances under which such a demand could have arisen to the Soviet Union.”
This possible incident was settled, but it could hardly have occurred under F. Roosevelt - even “atomic”. FDR was realistic in such situations and even delicate if he realized that he was wrong, as it happened, for example, in the matter of separate negotiations between Allen Dulles and Karl Wolf in Bern.
Franklin Roosevelt began as a fairly traditional bourgeois politician, and fate was quite merciful to him at first. However, in adulthood, under dramatic circumstances, he was forever paralyzed — his legs refused. Perhaps this gave the spiritual and moral forces of the FDR a new impetus, it became deeper and more humane.
The first time he was elected president of 4 on April 1933 of the year, and the fact that America’s practicing the cult of physical health voted for a disabled person four times in a row, talks a lot about the person’s personality traits. Radio talk "U kamelka", which the president has led with his fellow citizens for more than ten years, adds to his understanding.
Initially, Franklin Roosevelt was not a friend of Soviet Russia, he did not even become one at the end of his life. However, he had enough personal and historical scope to understand: without a mighty Russia there can be no stable world.
It is appropriate to recall the famous George Kennan, who began at the end of 40 with propaganda of the containment of the USSR, and ended up in 70 and 80 with complaints about the decline of our country and anxiety for the stability of the world without a powerful Russia in the form of the Soviet Union. “I’m seriously starting to worry that everything could fall apart,” he said shrewdly.
Atomic Physicist from USA Freeman Dyson, author of the book "Weapon and hope, ”wrote in 1984, that from the point of view of Kennan, Soviet power, with all its flaws, is a necessary component of any foreseeable system of international organization. “He is horrified to think about the chaos that will reign if Soviet power falls,” added the scientist. “And he is terrified by the irresponsibility of the Americans, who argue about weakening or destroying Soviet power, without thinking about the consequences to which this will lead.”
As for the FDR, he, like the sober-minded part of the US leadership, thought about developing a rational line for Washington towards the USSR for the first time at the beginning of the 30s. The fact that at the end of 1933, the United States established full diplomatic relations with the USSR was affected, of course, by a whole range of factors. Not the last of these was the rise to power of the Nazis in Germany at the beginning of 1933. However, in general, the recognition of the USSR fit into the general line of the famous "new course" of Franklin Roosevelt. The president has become the personification of those forces that recognized the need for policy change in relation to new realities.
Social cooperation with the masses was chosen as the vector of domestic policy, and overcoming “isolationism” was chosen as the external one. The most constructive new foreign policy was manifested in the attitude of Roosevelt America to Russia.
It does him honor. Especially when you consider that, almost since the formation of the United States, the “Russian aspect” of their policies was consistently anti-Russian. At the time of the Convention, Charles-Maurice Talleyrand, the future Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Directory, and Napoleon lived in America for two years. Here is his assessment: “Europe should always look at America with open eyes and not give any pretext for accusations or reprisals. America is getting stronger every day. It will turn into a tremendous force, and a moment will come when, in the face of Europe, the communication with which will become easier as a result of new discoveries, she wishes to have her say on our affairs and lay her hand on them. Political caution will then require the governments of the old continent to scrupulously observe that there is no pretext for such intervention. On the day that America comes to Europe, peace and security will be driven out of it for a long time. ”
This is an accurate forecast of the end of the XVIII century.
Neither the broad gestures of the United States towards Catherine II, nor the demonstration of force in favor of the United States of Lesovsky and Popov’s squadrons during the American Civil War, for example, could exclude the anti-Russian thrust of the Monroe Doctrine.
Today it is almost forgotten, but it was formulated in 1823 year against Russian America, and only gradually transformed into the doctrine of US domination in the Western Hemisphere - while not allowing any European country, and not only Russia.
To understand Washington’s policy vis-à-vis Russia, unfortunately, the assessment of Lieutenant-Commander P.N. Golovin, a plenipotentiary expert, who was in the Russian American possessions from spring 1860 to autumn 1861. In his report on October 20 from 1861, Pavel Nikolayevich positively assessed the prospects for Russian America, while noting: “As for the strengthening of friendly relations between Russia and the United States, it can be said that Americans will sympathize with us until it does not oblige them to anything or as long as it is profitable for them; Americans will never sacrifice their interests. ”
So it was. Moreover, the true attitude of the ruling circles of America towards Russia was clearly manifested in a speech delivered by Secretary of State William Seward during the Crimean War of 1854 – 1855. He then stated the following: “Turning my gaze to the Northwest, I see a Russian who is concerned with the construction of harbors, settlements and fortifications on the tip of this continent as outposts of St. Petersburg, and I can say:“ Go ahead and build your outposts along the entire coast even up to the Arctic Ocean - they will nevertheless become outposts of my own country, monuments of the civilization of the United States in the Northwest. "
No wonder that the influential Washington lawyer, former Finance Minister R. Walker, in July 1868, called the purchase of Russian America “the greatest act” of the Johnson-Seward administration and wrote to the Secretary of State: “The Pacific Ocean is our theater of the greatest triumphs, where there will be no terrible European rival. The end result will be political and commercial control over the world. ”
Franklin Roosevelt, in any case, in the first period of his political activity, did not reject such views. And, despite the establishment of full-fledged diplomatic relations with the USSR, it was not filled with friendliness to Soviet Russia. After the start of the German aggression against the USSR, the FDR waited at first: would Russia collapse "in three months"? The pre-war policy of the president of the United States objectively pitted Germany against the USSR. After all, the potential peace between these two countries excluded the political and commercial control of Washington over the world that Walker and Seward dreamed of.
No, F. Roosevelt was not a pacifist. Plenipotentiary representative of the capital of America, he consistently led both the world and the country to a new world war. The FDR line was unequivocally loyal to the strengthening of the Third Reich, it pushed the events that led to the Munich Agreement and the German invasion of Poland, and the Soviet-Finnish war - the FDR then almost broke off with us diplomatic relations, which he himself established.
Today we can assume that the tragedy of Pearl Harbor was directly programmed by the policy of the FDR, or rather, the ruling circles of the United States with the aim of overcoming in the compatriots the insults of inspiration that it has instilled over decades.
The admission of the defeat of the base in Hawaii allowed the United States to be connected - in the long run - to the finishing phase of the Second World War, just as it was done in the First World War epilogue.
In all these cases, F. Roosevelt acted as a typical Western politician. In the end, everyone acts no more than by virtue of his own understanding. But the understanding of the FDR deepened and deepened.
Therefore, both for history and for the present and the future, what the president was doing despite the narrowly understood US interests is valuable. The fact that F. Roosevelt showed himself as an atypical Western politician, and what made him a unique figure in the history of relations between Russia and the United States. When FDR overestimated its attitude towards the USSR, he overestimated it, apparently, finally and forever.
Refuting the accusations of “socialism”, the president said that he was a friend of capitalism, who urgently needed medicine to restore his health. After the war, F. Roosevelt could well provide the planet with truly peaceful coexistence with a strong Russia. Not on the basis of the Cold War and the arms race, not on the basis of striving for the dictates of the United States, but on the basis of the complex cooperation of nations.
As a result of World War II, the FDR did not become loyal to the ideas of socialism, it was clear from the content of his last public conversation “At the Little Chamber” on January 6 of January 1945: the president hinted at the post-war aggravation of relations with the USSR due to the increasing influence of Russia in Europe. However, he was obviously sincere when, at the end of his last speech, he said: “Today we, the Americans, are making history together with our allies. And I hope it will be a brighter story than the whole history of the past. ”
Periodically, there are reports that the top leadership of the United States — first of all, the same president — at least knew about the leakage of “atomic information” from the United States to the USSR during the war, and at the maximum provided it according to a direct agreement with J. Stalin and B. Molotov. What I know about the history of the Soviet atomic project - believe me, not so little - does not allow me to either confirm or deny this version. However, if we are to speculate, it cannot be ruled out that if F. Roosevelt had found out about such a leak, he most likely did not stop it. The FDR came to his views on Russia not as a result of insight, but as a result of an ever deeper understanding of the simple fact that humanity has only one home.
His unprecedented fourth term was due to end in 1947. But 12 on April 1945, Roosevelt, who felt great in the morning, died unexpectedly - ostensibly from a cerebral hemorrhage. No dissections of the body were performed.
Yes, you can hit in the not the most correct reasoning on the topic "What if ...".
But one can confidently assume: if Franklin Delano Roosevelt was at his post until the end of his fourth term, the history of Soviet-American relations, and accordingly of the whole world, could have developed differently.
For almost all of its history, the United States has been guided and guided by anti-Russian motives. Only the era of the "late Roosevelt" is a significant exception. This epoch is the only one of all in the modern history of the United States that could give the United States the role of one of two leaders cooperating for the benefit of all mankind.