Before reading this article, I sincerely invite you to click "follow", not only can have a good experience, but also have a different sense of participation, thank you for your attention!
preface
I hope you will forgive me for taking this unusual posture of sitting, but I know you will understand that it is much more convenient for me than having to carry almost ten pounds of steel on the lower part of my legs; That's because I've just returned from a 14,000-mile journey. First of all, I would like to say that it is good to be home. It was a long journey. I hope you will also agree that this has also been a productive trip so far. To put it bluntly, whether it is fully effective is largely a matter for everyone to decide.
For unless all of you here in this Chamber of the United States Congress — with the support of the American people — endorse the general conclusions reached at Yalta and actively support them, this meeting will not produce much long-term results. That's why I met with you as soon as I returned home. I am here to report to you personally – and to the people of the country. There will be many months of serious work ahead of us all. I am hopeful that when the last stone is laid on the fabric of international peace, it will be the achievement of all of us Americans working together with determination and generosity.
The achievement of working together
I returned from this trip – a distant journey – feeling refreshed and inspired. Throughout the whole process, I was in good health. I didn't feel uncomfortable for a second until I got back to Washington, where I heard all the rumors that had come up when I wasn't home. I came back refreshed and inspired. Roosevelt's family, as you might guess, were right, and didn't hate travel. We seem to be getting stronger and stronger! Although far away, I was constantly aware of the affairs of the United States. The modern marvel of fast communication has dramatically reduced the world.
We must never forget this fact when we speak of or think of international relations. I received a steady stream of telegrams from Washington—and I could also say, not only from the ministries of the executive branch, but also from the legislative branch—and I was able to take telegrams anywhere in the world, except where the use of radio had to be stopped for reasons of secrecy. Of course, in a serious emergency, we can even risk breaking the rules of secrecy. I returned from the Crimean Conference convinced that we had made a good start on the road to a peaceful world.
The Crimean conference had two main purposes. The first was to defeat Germany with the maximum possible speed and the smallest possible loss of Allied fighters. This goal is being vigorously pursued. The German Army, and the German people, are feeling the growing power of our soldiers and allied armies. Every hour is more proud of the heroic advance of our troops in Germany, Germany itself, towards the same courageous Red Army division. The second objective is to continue to lay the foundations for international agreements that will bring order and security after the chaos of war and that will provide some guarantees of lasting peace among the nations of the world.
Tremendous progress has also been made towards that goal. More than a year ago, in Tehran, the chiefs of staff of the three most powerful countries laid out long-term military plans. At the time, however, civilian leaders in Tehran only exchanged views and expressed their opinions. There was no political arrangement — and it was not intended to be — no political arrangement was intended. However, at the Crimean Conference, the time had come to seriously address specific issues in the political sphere.
At that meeting, all parties worked enthusiastically to reach agreement. Since the Tehran meeting a year ago, among all of us — what do I say? - It is easier to negotiate with each other, which is an auspicious omen for world peace. We got to know each other better. My faith in being able to reach agreement on guaranteeing world peace and security has never wavered at a moment. We did something concrete – for sure – things. For example, the absence of meetings between civilian representatives of the three main countries — fourteen months from Tehran to Yalta — proved to be too long.
For a long time, in places like Poland, Greece, Italy and Yugoslavia, local problems became acute. We therefore decided in Yalta that, even if objective conditions do not allow the heads of Government of the three countries to meet more frequently in the future, we pledge to have more frequent contacts between the Secretaries of State and Foreign Ministers of the three countries in order to exchange views. We have arranged for regular meetings every three to four months. I am confident that, under this arrangement, the kind of incident that troubled friends around the world last winter will not happen again.
It will not happen again
When we met in Yalta, in addition to formulating our strategic and tactical plans for a complete and complete military victory over Germany, there were a number of other issues, the political consequences of which were also of great importance. First, for example, the problems of post-war German occupation and control – the complete elimination of its military power and the guarantee that neither Nazi nor Prussian militarism can be revived to threaten world peace and civilization. Second, after the Dumbarton Oaks conference, there are still a few differences between us about international security organizations that need to be resolved.
You remember, I said at the time, we agreed to 90 percent. Well, that percentage is not small. I think the other ten percent was also settled in Yalta. Third, all regions that have been or will be liberated from the Nazi yoke share some universal political and economic problems. This is a very special problem. Those on our side find it difficult to understand the derivative consequences of many of these problems in foreign lands, but we are trying to understand them. Fourthly, there are the special problems raised by a few cases such as Poland and Yugoslavia.
We spent many days discussing these high-stakes issues, arguing freely and frankly across tables. But, in the end, on every point, we reached a unanimous agreement. And, even more important than verbal agreement, I can say that we have reached ideological agreement and found a way to get along. We know, of course, that the hope of Hitler and the German warlords is – and we cannot reach an agreement – that a small crack may appear in the iron wall of Allies unity that could give him and his bandit companions the last hope of escaping justice. And that was what Hitler's propaganda machine had been working on for many months.
However, Hitler did not succeed. Never before have the major allies been so closely united — not only for the purposes of war, but also for the purposes of peace. At the same time, they resolved to continue to unite with each other — with all peace-loving nations — in order to make the ideal of lasting peace a reality. The chiefs of staff of the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States met daily. They consulted frequently with Generalissimo Stalin, Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and myself on coordinating the strategies and tactics of the Allies. They completed the plan for a final decisive blow to Germany.
A decisive blow
At the time of the Tehran Conference, the Russian front was still far from the US-British front, and while some long-term strategic cooperation was possible, there could be no tactical-by-day coordination. They are still too far away. However, the Russian army has now crossed Poland. They were fighting in the eastern part of Germany itself; Anglo-American troops are now also in German lands in the west, near the Rhine. The situation is different now than it was fourteen months ago; Close tactical liaison was already possible for the first time in Europe – and, at the Crimean Conference, something else was done.
Between the armies on the Western Front under General Eisenhower and the armies on the Long Eastern Front under the Marshals of the Soviet Union, as well as with our armies in Italy, there was a daily exchange of information — without the need for the chiefs of staff who passed through Washington or London, as in the past. You can see one of the fruits of this exchange of information from the recent bombing of strongholds directly linked to the Russian march to Berlin. From now on, American and British heavy bombers will be used - day-by-day tactical operations of war - I think,
We have begun to realize that there is a big difference between tactical and strategic operations - day-by-day tactical operations in support of our own forces on the Western Front and direct support for Soviet troops. These heavy bombers were now bombing and strafing to obstruct the delivery of German reserves and materiel from the rest of Germany and Italy to the east-west front. Arrangements have been made to make the most effective allocation of all available materials and means of transport so that they can play the greatest role in joint operations – including the United States, Britain and Russia.
The details of these plans are, of course, a military secret; However, such a comprehensive cooperation would surely hasten the final fall of Germany. The Nazis had learned of some of this cooperation, much to their dismay. I think all three of us at the meeting thought that the Nazis would learn more tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow! Won't give them time to breathe. We will not stop for a moment until they surrender unconditionally.
As you know, I've always thought that ordinary insight will eventually prevail – after quiet night thinking. I think this is true in Germany as it is here. The German soldiers, as well as the German people, must have realized that the sooner they surrendered, individually or in groups, their present sufferings would end. They must realize that only by total surrender can they begin to be accepted by the world again as decent neighbours.
Resources
Pursuing “the Unhappiest Idea Possible” in James Fenimore Cooper’s Leather-Stocking Tales. Keat Murray.Early American Literature,2016
‘What they Seek for is in Themselves’: Quaker Language and Thought in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century American Literature*. James Peacock.Quaker Studies,2008
Religion, Feminism, and the Problem of Agency: Reflections on Eighteenth‐Century Quakerism. Phyllis Mack.Signs,2003