The act formalized de jure the results of the Second World War and created the legal basis for that European order international relations in which we live. The document was signed by representatives of 35 states: the USA, Canada and all European countries except Albania.
In the novel Maleville, published in 1972, Robert Merle realistically depicted what happened after the global nuclear disaster (which happened at the author's will without any reason in April 1977).
During the years when work on Maleville was underway, there was a feeling of the approaching end human history was in the air. The arsenals of superweapons accumulated in the USA and the USSR guaranteed the instant destruction of all life on Earth during the conflict between two military-political blocs aimed at each other in a long-term hostile confrontation. Such a conflict could break out at any moment due to another aggravation of relations, as a result of a provocation, or even due to an elementary technical failure in one or another link of the cumbersome military-political mechanisms.
The situation seemed hopeless not only to pessimistic authors of dystopias, but also to politicized ordinary people on both sides iron curtain, which divided Europe and the entire planet.
However, Merle's future scenario, as we know, did not come true.
In the interval between the release of Maleville and the date of the nuclear blitz-Armageddon indicated in the novel, what came to be called “détente between East and West” occurred. The likelihood of a global cataclysm has sharply decreased thanks to the efforts of politicians who were able to find compromise solutions to a number of pressing international security problems.
Detente seemed like an unexpected gift of fate for the Soviet Union (the weakest in the global confrontation between the two superpowers), but its side effects significantly accelerated the collapse of the world socialist system.
Helsinki-75
The culmination of détente was the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe held in Helsinki.
It should be admitted that we, living in today's Russia, atomic weapons has brought considerable benefits, which allows us to some extent come to terms with the material costs, human losses and suffering that befell our people during many years of unequal competition with America in the production of means of mass destruction.
The States that signed the Final Act of this meeting on August 1, 1975, declared their determination to respect and apply to each of them with all other participating States, regardless of their political, economic and social systems, from their sizes, geographical location and level economic development, the following ten principles (which are light hand journalists soon became known as the “ten commandments of European security”):
1. Sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty.
2. Non-use of force or threat of force.
3. Inviolability of borders.
4. Territorial integrity of states.
5. Peaceful settlement of disputes.
6. Non-interference in internal affairs.
7. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief.
8. Equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies.
9. Cooperation between states.
10. Conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law.
In addition, the participating states of the Conference on Security and Cooperation declared their intention to conduct their relations with all other states in the spirit of the above principles.
By accepting paragraph 1 of the "commandments", the United States of America and its European allies recognized the right to exist socialist system and renounced their previous policy of “throwing out communism.”
Obliging not to interfere in other people's internal affairs (according to clause 6), Western countries at the same time, they retained certain levers of pressure on their eastern partners in accordance with the human rights 7th paragraph.
The Soviet leaders agreed to endure the inconveniences associated with this point for the sake of the 3rd and 4th points, with the adoption of which the key task of the entire post-war policy of the USSR was solved: the existing de facto borders were finally recognized and the territorial changes carried out in Europe as a result of the Potsdam Conference were legally enshrined 1945.
The progressive public in the countries of Eastern and Western Europe expressed hopes that a fair and secure order in Europe would be built on the principles reflected in the text of the Final Act - the order that should have been (but was not) created immediately after the end of World War II.
Success dope for the doomed
The Helsinki Conference, organized at the initiative of the USSR, became the most significant triumph of the Soviet foreign policy for the entire post-war period.
However, this triumph turned out to be for the Soviet Union and the entire socialist system something similar to a glass of an invigorating intoxicating drink offered to a hopelessly ill person. At first there was a state of euphoria from unprecedented success, then the processes of decomposition and decay sharply accelerated.
Socialist way Soviet type, ideally suited to solve the problems of national survival in extreme conditions pre-war, war and post-war times, could not compete with democratic capitalism during the period of relatively peaceful coexistence of the two systems.
The first symptom of trouble in the socialist camp was the increase in dissident activity in the area from Berlin to Magadan. Internal opponents of socialism decided to irritate the authorities with reminders of the “seventh commandment” of the Final Act, which requires respect for human rights.
The Communist Party leaders somehow coped with this scourge. But in 1980, an entire socialist country, Poland, dissented.
In 1945, Stalin at the Potsdam Conference pushed through a formulation according to which western border Poland became a line drawn along the Oder and Neisse rivers (temporarily, as it were, until a full-fledged peace treaty was concluded).
Having received the ancient Polish lands, captured by the German princes in XI-XIII centuries, the communist rulers of Poland could, without losing face in the eyes of their subjects, abandon the Western Belarusian and Western Ukrainian territories that were transferred to the Soviet Union in 1939. The ancient dispute between the Slavs among themselves was thus closed at the expense of defeated Germany, which lost a quarter of its pre-war territory.
Soon after Potsdam, the United States and its allies refused to recognize the border lines drawn by Stalin's cartographers. Because of this refusal, freedom-loving Poles remained staunch allies of the USSR for several decades, even at times rebelling against their own communist rulers.
The need to maintain Soviet-Polish friendship “forever” disappeared after August 1, 1975, when all European countries, together with Canada and the United States, became guarantors of the inviolability of Polish borders and Polish territorial integrity.
The leaders of the Solidarity movement, which stirred up the whole of Poland in 1980, could, without fear for the fate of their beloved fatherland, come out with anti-communist and anti-Soviet slogans, causing storms of delight in all strata of Polish society.
A dangerous gap has opened up in the monolithic structure of the socialist camp. Cracks stretched from it in all directions: after the Poles, Czechs, Hungarians and other socialist prisoners, who missed freedom, began to move.
The further development of such processes threatened to turn into a series of bloody revolutions and counter-revolutionary actions with the direct participation of Soviet security forces.
Fortunately for Eastern Europeans, the system of power of the CPSU in the Soviet Union itself after 1985 disintegrated in an accelerated perestroika mode. Demoralized by Gorbachev's policies, communist leaders Eastern Europe hastened to surrender without a fight to the mercy of the masses, overwhelmed by the desire for freedom and democracy.
Much blood was shed only where the Communist parties did not depend on Moscow - in Romania and Yugoslavia.
Features of the newest European order
According to Robert Merle's post-historical chronicle, a handful of survivors of a nuclear holocaust are facing new disasters due to a self-proclaimed contender for power trying to impose his will on everyone else through deceit and force of arms.
Schengen has become the main innovation of the EU on the eve of the new century. After all, the European Union as a unique association European countries combines characteristics international organization and states. Although all EU member countries are independent, they have same rules training, medical care, pension, judicial system and so on. The laws of the European Union, and above all Schengen, apply in all EU countries.
IN modern Europe, having experienced the horror of balancing on the brink of a nuclear disaster, the will of the power that lays claim to world hegemony is shamelessly imposed as the supreme law that prevails over the hopelessly outdated Helsinki “commandments.”
The International Court of Justice in The Hague, as is known, recently decided by a majority vote (belonging to representatives of America and its allies) that Kosovo’s self-declaration of independence does not contradict the norms of international law.
The small Albanian predator provided some services to the American giant and, as a bonus, got the opportunity to torment his Slavic neighbors, deprived of rights defend effectively. Having legalized this practice, the Hague verdict fully revealed the essence of the order that is being formed in the neighborhood of Russia, but without its participation.
In the US-subordinate community of developed and developing countries there is no place for Helsinki equality of sovereignties. The sovereign rights of each state are recognized to the extent consistent with the provisions of this state V informal hierarchy, depending on it own resources influence, as well as proximity to the Washington super-sovereign.
There can be no talk of equal rights among nations. Those who are stronger (primarily long-time allies of the United States) feel confident. The weak (including all the recent inhabitants of the socialist camp), for the sake of comfort and safety, are trying in every possible way to play along, sing along and howl to the United States.
Interference in the internal affairs of those who do not have the strength to resist it is becoming common practice. Most often, human rights claims are used as a reason for such interference.
Meanwhile, the successful breach of Serbian territorial integrity in order to protect the rights of Kosovo Albanians could become an example to follow in the most unexpected places.
In Germany and Austria, demands are already being raised for the restoration of the rights of the Sudeten people, violated by the Czechs after the Second World War. And then, you see, it will be the turn of the Silesian, Pomeranian, Prussian, etc. people. With all the ensuing consequences for the Czech Republic, Poland and some other ex-socialist countries that have given up their sovereignty to the care of NATO and the European Union.
All this does not seem to affect the completely sovereign Russia, with its missiles, petrodollars and great power status inherited from the USSR and the Russian Empire.
But everything in the world is interconnected. And if a bell rings for someone in Europe, it will ring for us too. Hemingway, who had a good understanding of the destinies of people and nations, once spoke about this.
|
This version of the page has not been reviewed by authorized participants. You can read the last verified or so-called. stable version from 01/01/01, but it may differ significantly from the current version. 1 edit requires verification. | |
|
|
Final Act
The text of the final act is available in many languages, and, in particular, in Russian.
Interstate agreements grouped into several sections:
- in the international legal field: consolidation of the political and territorial results of the Second World War, outlining the principles of relations between the participating states, including the principle of the inviolability of borders; territorial integrity of states; non-interference in internal affairs foreign countries; in the military-political field: coordination of confidence-building measures in the military field (pre-notification of military exercises and major troop movements, presence of observers at military exercises); peaceful settlement of disputes; in the economic field: coordination of the main areas of cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology and defense environment; in the humanitarian field: harmonization of obligations on issues of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of movement, contacts, information, culture and education, the right to work, the right to education and health care.
http://ru. wikipedia. org/wiki/Final_Act of the Meeting on Security and Cooperation in Europe
MEETING ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
FINAL ACT
HELSINKI 1975
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which began in Helsinki on July 3, 1973
mindful about my general history and recognizing that existence common elements in their
traditions and values can help them develop their relationships, and fulfilled desires
seek, taking fully into account the uniqueness and diversity of their positions and views,
opportunities to unite their efforts in order to overcome mistrust and strengthen trust,
resolve problems that divide them and cooperate in the interests of humanity;
recognizing indivisibility of security in Europe, as well as its common interest in
development of cooperation throughout Europe and among themselves, and expressing their intention to undertake
accordingly, efforts;
recognizing close connection between peace and security in Europe and the world as a whole and being aware
the need for each of them to contribute to strengthening international peace And
security and in promoting fundamental rights, economic and social progress And
the well-being of all peoples;
accepted the following:
a) Declaration of principles by which States Parties will
be guided in mutual relations
States Parties,
confirming its commitment to peace, security and justice and the process
development of friendly relations and cooperation;
recognizing that this commitment, reflecting the interests and aspirations of peoples, embodies for
each participating State's responsibility now and in the future, increased as a result
past experience;
confirming, in accordance with their membership in the United Nations and in
in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, its full and active
supporting the United Nations and enhancing its role and effectiveness in
strengthening international peace, security and justice and promoting solutions
international problems, as well as the development of friendly relations and cooperation between
states;
expressing its general commitment to the principles set out below and which
are in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations as well as their general will
to act, in the application of these principles, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter
United Nations;
declare about his determination to respect and apply in the relations of each of them with all
other participating States, regardless of their political, economic and social
systems, as well as their size, geographical location and level of economic development,
the following principles, which are all of paramount importance and which they will
be guided in mutual relations:
I. Sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty
The participating States will respect each other's sovereign equality and identity, and
all rights inherent in and covered by their sovereignty, which include, in particular,
the right of every state to legal equality, to territorial integrity, to freedom and
political independence. They will also respect each other's right to freely choose and
develop their political, social, economic and cultural systems, as well as law
establish their own laws and administrative rules.
own conscience.
The participating States on whose territory there are national minorities will
respect the right of persons belonging to such minorities to equality before the law, will
provide them with full opportunity to actually enjoy human rights and fundamental
freedoms and will thus protect their legitimate interests in this area.
The participating States recognize the universal importance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
respect of which is an essential factor for peace, justice and prosperity,
necessary to ensure the development of friendly relations and cooperation between them,
as well as between all states.
They will respect these rights and freedoms at all times in their mutual relations and will
make efforts, jointly and independently, including cooperation with the Organization
United Nations, in order to promote universal and effective respect for them.
They confirm the right of individuals to know their rights and responsibilities in this area and to act
in accordance with them.
In the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the participating States will act in accordance with
in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They
will also fulfill their obligations as established in international declarations and
agreements in this area, including but not limited to the International Covenants on Human Rights, if
they are connected by them.
VIII. Equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies
The participating States will respect the equality and right of peoples to dispose of their
destiny, acting at all times in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and
relevant rules of international law, including those relating to
territorial integrity of states.
Based on the principle of equality and the right of peoples to decide their own destinies, all peoples
always have the right in conditions complete freedom determine when and how they wish their
internal and external political status without outside interference and carry out on your own
discretion of their political, economic, social and cultural development.
The participating States reaffirm the universal importance of respect and effective
implementation of equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies for development
friendly relations between them, as well as between all states; they also remind
about the importance of eliminating any form of violation of this principle.
IX. Cooperation between states
The participating States will develop their cooperation with each other, as with all
states, in all fields, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. Developing your
cooperation, the participating States will attach special meaning areas like them
determined within the framework of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and each of them
will contribute in full equality.
They will strive, by developing their cooperation as equals, to promote
mutual understanding and trust, friendly and good neighborly relations among themselves,
international peace, security and justice. They will equally strive
by developing their cooperation, improve the well-being of peoples and contribute to the implementation of
life of their aspirations, taking advantage in particular of the benefits flowing from an expanding mutual
familiarization and their progress and achievements in economic, scientific, technical, social,
cultural and humanitarian fields. They will take steps to promote conditions
conducive to making these benefits available to everyone; they will take into account
interests of all in reducing differences in levels of economic development and, in particular, the interests
developing countries around the world.
They confirm that governments, institutions, organizations and people can play
appropriate and positive role in helping to achieve these goals of their cooperation.
They will strive, by expanding their cooperation as defined above, to develop
closer relations among themselves on a better and more durable basis for the benefit of the peoples.
X. Conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law
The participating States will fulfill in good faith their obligations under
international law, as well as those obligations that arise from generally accepted principles and
rules of international law, as well as those obligations that arise from the relevant
international law of treaties or other agreements to which they are parties.
In the exercise of their sovereign rights, including the right to make their own laws and
administrative rules, they will be consistent with their legal obligations
under international law; they will, in addition, take due account and implement
provisions of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.
The participating States confirm that, where the obligations of members
The United Nations, according to the Charter of the United Nations, will be in
conflict with their obligations under any treaty or other international
agreement, their obligations under the Charter, in accordance with Article
103 of the UN Charter.
All the principles stated above are of paramount importance and therefore__________ they
will be equally and strictly applied when interpreting each of them taking into account the others.
The participating States express their determination to fully respect and apply these
principles as set forth in this Declaration, in all respects, to their mutual relations
and cooperation to ensure that each participating State benefits from
resulting from the respect and application of these principles by all.
The participating States, having due regard to the principles set out above and, in
in particular, the first phrase of the tenth principle, “Faithful fulfillment of obligations under
international law", note that this Declaration does not affect their rights and
obligations, as well as relevant treaties and other agreements and arrangements.
The participating States express the conviction that respect for these principles will
promote the development of normal and friendly relations and the progress of cooperation
between them in all areas. They also express the conviction that respect for these principles
will contribute to the development of political contacts between them, which, in turn,
will contribute to a better mutual understanding of their positions and views.
The participating States declare their intention to carry out their relations with all
other States in the spirit of the principles set out in this Declaration.
b)Questions, related to the implementation of some
from principles, stated above
i) States- participants,
confirming that they will respect and implement the non-use of force clause
or threats of force, and convinced of the necessity of making it an effective law
international life,
declare what they will respect and fulfill in their relationships with each other, including
the following provisions, which are in accordance with the Declaration of Principles by which
The participating states will be guided in mutual relations by:
– To put into practice and express in all ways and in all forms that they deem
appropriate, the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force in relationships
together.
– Refrain from any use of armed force incompatible with the objectives and
principles of the UN Charter and the provisions of the Declaration of Principles by which States
participants will be guided in mutual relations, against another state-
participant, especially from invasion or attack on its territory.
- Refrain from all manifestations of force for the purpose of coercing another state -
participant to renounce the full exercise of its sovereign rights.
– Refrain from any act of economic coercion aimed at subordination
its interests in the exercise by another State Party of the rights inherent in its
sovereignty, and thus ensuring advantages of any kind.
– Take effective measures that, by their scope and nature, are steps in
towards achieving ultimately universal and complete disarmament under strict and
effective international control.
– To promote, by all means which each of them may deem fit, the creation
atmosphere of trust and respect between peoples, consistent with their duty to refrain
from propaganda of aggressive wars or any use of force or threat of force,
incompatible with the purposes of the United Nations and with the Declaration of Principles by which
participating states will be guided in mutual relations, against each other
State Party.
– Make every effort to resolve any disputes between them, continued
which could threaten the maintenance of international peace and security in Europe,
exclusively by peaceful means, and above all try to resolve disputes through
peaceful means specified in Article 33 of the UN Charter.
– Refrain from any actions that could impede a peaceful settlement
disputes between participating states.
ii) States- participants,
confirming ____________their determination to resolve their disputes as determined in principle
peaceful settlement of disputes;
convinced is that the peaceful settlement of disputes is a complement to the non-use
force or threat of force, both of which are significant, although not
exceptional, to maintain and strengthen peace and security;
wanting strengthen and improve the means of peaceful
dispute resolution;
1. Determined to continue to consider and develop a generally acceptable method of peaceful
settlement of disputes aimed at complementing existing funds, and for this purpose
work on the "Draft Convention on European system peaceful settlement of disputes",
presented by Switzerland at the second stage of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe, as well as other proposals related to it and aimed at developing such
2. Decide that a meeting of experts will be convened at the invitation of Switzerland
all participating States for the purpose of fulfilling the task set out in paragraph 1, within the framework and subject to
following the procedures for next steps after the Meeting, as defined in the section “Next
steps after the meeting."
3. This meeting of experts will take place after the meeting of representatives appointed by the ministers
Foreign Affairs of the participating States, planned in accordance with the section "Further
steps after the Meeting" for 1977; the results of this meeting of experts will be
presented to governments.
Document on Confidence Building Measures and Some Aspects
security and disarmament
States- participants
wanting eliminate the causes of tension that may exist between them, and thus
contribute to strengthening peace and security in the world;
full of determination strengthen trust among themselves and thereby contribute to the strengthening
stability and security in Europe;
full of determination also to abstain in their mutual, as in general in their
international relations from the use of force or threat of force as against territorial
integrity or political independence of any state, or any other
in a manner incompatible with the purposes of the United Nations and with the agreement adopted in this Final Act
Declaration of principles that will guide the participating States in mutual
relationships;
recognizing the need to help reduce the risk of armed conflict,
misunderstanding or incorrect assessment of military activities that could
raise concerns, in particular in circumstances where participating States lack clear and
timely information about the nature of such activities;
pay attention to considerations related to efforts to reduce
tensions and promotion of disarmament;
recognizing I believe that there will be an exchange of observers at military exercises by invitation
promote contacts and mutual understanding;
having studied issue of advance notification of major troop movements
in relation to confidence building;
recognizing that there are other means by which individual States can
further contribute to the achievement of their common goals;
convinced in the political importance of advance notification of major military
exercises to promote mutual understanding and build trust, stability and security;
taking the responsibility of each of them to promote these goals and
carry out this measure in accordance with the agreed criteria and conditions, which is essential
to achieve these goals;
recognizing, that this measure, resulting from political decision, relies on voluntary
adopted the following:
Advance notice of major military exercises
They will notify all other participating states of their major military exercises
through normal diplomatic channels in accordance with the following provisions:
Notifications will be given about major military exercises ground forces general
numbering more than people, carried out independently or jointly with any
possible air or naval components (in this context the word
"troops" includes amphibious and airborne troops). In case of independent exercises
amphibious or airborne troops, or joint exercises in which they participate, these
troops will also be included in this number. Notices may also be given in the event
joint exercises that do not reach the above number, but in which
ground forces along with significant amount amphibious or airborne
troops or both.
Notifications will be given of major military exercises taking place in Europe at
territory of any State Party and, if applicable, in adjacent
sea area and airspace.
In the event that the territory of a Member State extends beyond Europe,
advance notice should only be given for exercises that are conducted within
250 km from its border facing any other European Member State
or common with it, however, it is not necessary for the State Party to give notice in
case where this area is also adjacent to its border facing non-European
non-participating state or common with it.
Notifications will be provided 21 days or more prior to the start of the exercise or at the earliest
possible before its start date if the exercise is scheduled in a shorter period of time.
The notice will contain information about the name, if one is assigned,
the overall purpose of the exercise, the states participating in it, the type or types and number of participants
troops, area and expected date of its implementation. The participating States will also, if
it is possible to provide appropriate Additional information, in particular this
which concerns the components of the forces involved and the timing of the deployment of these forces.
Advance notice of other military exercises
The participating States recognize that they can contribute to further strengthening
confidence and strengthening security and stability and for this purpose may also notify
smaller-scale military exercises, other participating States, especially those
located near the area where such exercises are taking place.
For the same purpose, States Parties also recognize that they may notify others
military exercises conducted by them.
Exchange of observers
The participating States will invite other participating States, in a voluntary
orderly and on a bilateral basis, in a spirit of reciprocity and goodwill towards all states -
participants, send observers to attend military exercises.
The inviting state will determine in each case the number of observers
the terms and conditions of their participation and provide such other information as it may consider
useful. It will provide appropriate conditions and hospitality.
The invitation will be sent through normal diplomatic channels to the extent
as far in advance as possible.
Advance notice of major troop movements
participating States have examined the issue of advance notification of major movements
troops as a confidence-building measure.
Accordingly, the participating States acknowledge that they may, in their own
discretion and to promote confidence, notify major movements
of their troops.
In the same spirit, the participating states of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe will undertake further consideration of the issue of pre-notification
major troop movements, bearing in mind in particular the experience gained during
implementation of the measures that are set out in this document.
Other confidence-building measures
The participating States recognize that there are other means by which
promote their common goals.
In particular, they will be with due regard to reciprocity and with a view to better mutual understanding
facilitate exchanges by invitation between military personnel, including military visits
delegations.
In order to do more full contribution in their common goal confidence-building, state-
participants, carrying out their military activities in the area covered by the provisions of the
advance notice of major military exercises will be given due consideration
attention and respect for this goal.
They also recognize that the experience gained through the implementation of the provisions
outlined above, together with subsequent efforts, could lead to the development and expansion of measures
aimed at strengthening trust.
Issues related to disarmament
The participating States recognize the interest of all of them in efforts aimed at
The fundamental document on security and cooperation in Europe is the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), signed in Helsinki on August 1, 1975 by the leaders of 33 European countries, the United States and Canada.
The Helsinki Final Act consolidated the political and territorial results of the Second World War and established ten principles (the Helsinki Decalogue) of relations between states: sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty; non-use of force or threat of force; inviolability of borders; territorial integrity; peaceful settlement of disputes; non-interference in internal affairs; respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies; cooperation between states; fulfillment of international legal obligations.
The Helsinki Final Act formed the basis for the work of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and for a long time enshrined the key principles of global security. But much has changed over the years, and Western countries are now calling for a revision of the document. Row Western politicians V Lately began to talk about the organization's inability to resist modern challenges. Russia does not intend to abandon the Helsinki Act, but proposes to modernize it in accordance with modern realities.
In 2013, a draft concept for a new agreement was proposed, which was called “Helsinki Plus 40”. However, from the very beginning, the participants could not agree on the main components of the document. Thus, Russia opposed the revision of the basic principles of the Helsinki Act and insists only on their updating. The Russian Foreign Ministry emphasizes the need to preserve the OSCE.
In December 2014, diplomats agreed to continue the Helsinki Plus 40 process. A special expert body was created, which was called the “Group of Wise Men”. Its work should contribute to constructive dialogue on security issues, as well as the restoration of trust in the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian regions and the strengthening of OSCE commitments.
The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources
The detente between the West and the East made it possible to convene the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Consultations on it took place in 1972-1973. in the capital of Finland, Helsinki. The first stage of the meeting was held at the level of foreign ministers from July 3 to July 7, 1973 in Helsinki. Representatives from 33 European countries, as well as the USA and Canada - See: Valiullin K.B., Zaripova R.K. Russian history. XX century Part 2: Tutorial. - Ufa: RIO BashSU, 2002. P.148..
The second phase of the meeting took place in Geneva from September 18, 1973 to July 21, 1975. It represented rounds of negotiations lasting from 3 to 6 months at the level of delegates and experts appointed by the participating states. At this stage, agreements were developed and agreed upon on all items on the meeting agenda.
The third stage of the meeting took place in Helsinki on July 30 - August 1, 1975 at the level of senior political and government leaders of the countries participating in the meeting, who headed national delegations - See: History of Russia, 1945-2008. : book for the teacher / [A.V. Filippov, A.I. Utkin, S.V. Alekseev and others] ; edited by A.V. Filippova. -- 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Education, 2008. P.247..
The Helsinki Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) from July 3 to August 1, 1975 was the result of a peaceful progressive process in Europe. Representatives of 33 European countries, as well as the USA and Canada were present in Helsinki. The meeting was attended by: general secretary Central Committee of the CPSU L. I. Brezhnev, US President J. Ford, French President V. Giscard d'Estaing, British Prime Minister G. Wilson, Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany G. Schmidt, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the PUWP E. Terek; General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China , President of Czechoslovakia G. Husak, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED E. Honecker, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the BCP, Chairman State Council NRB T. Zhivkov, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Russian Socialist Labor Party J. Kadar; Secretary General of the RCP, President of Romania N. Ceausescu; Chairman of the UCC, President of Yugoslavia Josip Broz Tito and other leaders of the participating states. The Declaration adopted by the CSCE proclaimed the inviolability of European borders, mutual renunciation of the use of force, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-interference in the internal affairs of participating countries, respect for human rights, etc.
The heads of delegations signed the Final Act of the meeting. This document is still in effect today. It includes agreements that must be implemented in full as a whole, on:
1) security in Europe,
2) cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology, environmental protection;
3) cooperation in humanitarian and other fields;
4) further steps after the meeting - See: Ratkovsky I. S., Khodyakov M. V. History Soviet Russia- St. Petersburg: Publishing House "Lan", 2001. P.414..
The Final Act contains 10 principles defining the norms of relationships and cooperation: sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty; non-use of force or threat of force; inviolability of borders; territorial integrity; peaceful settlement of disputes; non-interference in internal affairs; respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies; cooperation between states; fulfillment of international legal obligations.
The Final Act guaranteed the recognition and inviolability of post-war borders in Europe (which was to the advantage of the USSR) and imposed obligations on all participating states to respect human rights (this became the basis for using the problem of human rights against the USSR) - See: Sokolov A.K. , Tyazhelnikova V.S. Well Soviet history, 1941-1999. - M.: Higher. school, 1999. P.195..
The signing of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) by the heads of 33 European states, as well as the United States and Canada on August 1, 1975 in Helsinki became the apogee of détente. The Final Act included a declaration of principles for relations between the CSCE participating countries. Highest value The USSR attached recognition to the inviolability of post-war borders and the territorial integrity of states, which meant the international legal consolidation of the situation in Eastern Europe. The triumph of Soviet diplomacy was the result of a compromise: the Final Act also included articles on the protection of human rights, freedom of information and movement. These articles served as the international legal basis for the dissident movement within the country and the campaign to protect human rights in the USSR, which was actively carried out in the West.
It should be said that, starting from 1973, there was an independent negotiation process between representatives of NATO and the Department of Internal Affairs on arms reduction. However, the desired success was not achieved here due to the tough position of the countries Warsaw Pact, surpassing NATO in common types weapons and did not want to reduce them.
After the signing of the Helsinki Final Act Soviet Union felt like a master in Eastern Europe and began installing new SS-20 medium-range missiles in the GDR and Czechoslovakia, restrictions on which were not provided for by the SALT agreements. .Under the conditions of the campaign to protect human rights in the USSR, which sharply intensified in the West after Helsinki, the position of the USSR became extremely tough. This prompted retaliatory measures from the United States, which, after Congress refused to ratify SALT II in the early 1980s, placed Western Europe"cruise missiles" and Pershing missiles capable of reaching the territory of the Soviet Union. Thus, a military-strategic balance was established between the blocs in Europe - See: History of Russia. 1917--2004: Educational. manual for university students / A. S. Barsenkov, A. I. Vdovin. - M.: Aspect Press, 2005. P.514..
The arms race had an extremely negative impact on the economies of countries whose military-industrial orientation did not decrease. The general extensive development increasingly affected the defense industry. The parity with the United States achieved in the early 1970s concerned primarily intercontinental ballistic missiles. Already from the late 1970s, the general crisis of the Soviet economy began to have an impact negative impact to the defense industries. The Soviet Union began to gradually fall behind in certain species weapons. This was discovered after the emergence of the US " cruise missiles"and became even more obvious after the United States began working on the" strategic defense initiative"(SOI). Since the mid-1980s, the leadership of the USSR has begun to clearly realize this lag. The depletion of the regime's economic capabilities is becoming more and more apparent.
The key event of détente in Europe was the meeting on security and cooperation on the continent, which took place in the capital of Finland, Helsinki, in three stages:
At the first stage, July 3-7, 1973, a meeting of foreign ministers developed an agenda and determined the main directions of work.
At the second (September 18, 1973 - July 21, 1975), experts prepared the main documents of the meeting on security, economic and humanitarian issues.
On August 1, 1975, the leaders of 33 European states, as well as the USA and Canada, signed the Final Act of the meeting. Its core is the Declaration of Principles that will guide the participating States in their mutual relations.
The Declaration includes the following principles:
1. Respect for sovereignty.
2. Non-use of force or threat of force.
3. Inviolability of borders.
4. Territorial integrity of states.
5. Peaceful settlement of disputes.
6. Non-interference in internal affairs.
7. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
8. Equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies.
9. Cooperation between states.
10. Conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law.
In addition to the Declaration, the following documents were adopted: “Cooperation in the field of economics, technology, environment”, “Cooperation in humanitarian and other fields”, “The issue of security cooperation in the Mediterranean”, “On confidence-building measures and some aspects of security and disarmament” .
The Helsinki Conference was a turning point in the period of détente. Even the return to confrontation in the early 1980s could not overcome the significance of the Helsinki process.
Final Act: Interstate agreements, grouped into several sections:
In the international legal field: consolidating the political and territorial results of the Second World War, setting out the principles of relations between participating states, including the principle of the inviolability of borders; territorial integrity of states; non-interference in the internal affairs of foreign states;
In the military-political field: coordination of confidence-building measures in the military field (pre-notification of military exercises and major troop movements, presence of observers at military exercises); peaceful settlement of disputes;
In the economic field: coordination of the main areas of cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology and environmental protection;
In the humanitarian field: harmonization of obligations on issues of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of movement, contacts, information, culture and education, the right to work, the right to education and health care.
53. End of the Vietnam War. "Nixon's Guam Doctrine". Paris Conference on Vietnam. Basic solutions.
After the signing of the armistice agreement, the South Vietnamese troops numbered more than a million people, the armed forces of North Vietnam stationed on the territory of the South numbered more than two hundred thousand soldiers.
The ceasefire agreements in South Vietnam were not implemented. Both the communists and the South Vietnamese government troops divided the territory under their control during the battles. Northern Vietnam continued to transfer reinforcements to his troops in the south along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, which was facilitated by the cessation of American bombing. Economic crisis South Vietnam, as well as the reduction in the volume of American military assistance under pressure from the US Congress in 1974, contributed to the decline in the fighting qualities of the South Vietnamese troops. An increasing number of territories of South Vietnam de facto fell under the rule of North Vietnam. South Vietnamese government troops suffered losses. In December 1974 - January 1975, the North Vietnamese army conducted a test operation to capture Phuoc Long Province to test the US response. Convinced that the United States did not intend to resume its participation in the war, in early March 1975, North Vietnamese troops launched a large-scale offensive. The South Vietnamese army was disorganized and in most areas failed to provide adequate resistance. As a result of a two-month campaign, North Vietnamese troops occupied most South Vietnam and approached Saigon. On April 30, 1975, the communists raised the banner over the Independence Palace in Saigon - the war was over.
The Guam Doctrine is a doctrine put forward by Richard Nixon on June 25, 1969, during a speech to military personnel on the island of Guam. The essence of the Guam Doctrine was that the United States abandoned its obligation to defend its allies from external aggression with the help of its army, except in cases of aggression from major powers such as China or the USSR. In this case, they were guaranteed protection from nuclear strikes and air and naval support. US allies had to deal with local communist movements or hostile neighbors on their own.
This US step was positively received by the rest of the world. By 1973, the United States completed its withdrawal from Vietnam, and in 1975 the Vietnam War ended in complete victory for the Vietnamese communists.
During the war, 56,555 American military personnel were killed, 303,654 Americans were injured, and after the withdrawal of American troops, US opponents won a complete and unconditional victory in the war. All this had a negative impact on the state of American society - the result of the Vietnam War was seen as a defeat for the United States, and psychological trauma was inflicted on the entire country. However, even during the war, the United States began to look for ways to relieve international tension, and this, together with the new foreign policy doctrine, made détente in international relations possible. As a result, the United States was able to improve relations with China and the USSR and subsequently play on the contradictions between them, which strengthened the US position on the world stage.
The 1973 Paris Agreement on ending the war and restoring peace in Vietnam, signed on January 27 by the foreign ministers of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the United States, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam (PRG RYV) and the Saigon administration; text P. s. developed during the Paris negotiations four sides in Vietnam, which began in January 1969. In accordance with Art. 1 P. p. The United States pledged to respect the independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Vietnam
Subsequent articles stipulated the immediate cessation of military operations in South Vietnam, as well as all US military operations against the Democratic Republic of Vietnam; complete withdrawal from South Vietnam within 60 days of troops and military personnel of the United States and other foreign states allied to the United States and the Saigon administration.
Signing P. s. was an important victory for the Vietnamese people, the peace-loving forces of the whole world in the fight against imperialist aggression, and a significant contribution to the easing of international tension.
Loading...
