The Marshal's Plan is the first confrontation between the Western and Eastern blocs. Why did the USSR reject the Marshall Plan?

The Marshall Plan, a program of large-scale economic assistance to European countries devastated by World War II, was probably the most successful US foreign policy experiment.

The plan got its name from US Secretary of State George C.Marshall. However, its real author was US President Harry Truman. The decision to name the unprecedented project after the Secretary of State was made for tactical reasons: Truman, unlike Marshall, did not enjoy support in the US Congress, which was supposed to approve appropriations for the restoration of Europe.

The forerunner of the Marshall Plan was the Truman Doctrine, adopted in March 1947, which provided for economic assistance to Turkey, Greece and, later, Italy. The Truman Doctrine was a response to the communists coming to power in the states of Eastern Europe occupied by Soviet troops. Greece (there was a civil war there) and Turkey were also under pressure from the USSR, which wanted to establish communist regimes in these countries. After providing economic assistance and stabilizing the situation, the communists in these countries lost the elections.

In June 1947, Marshall unveiled his plan, which received strong approval from the Europeans, but a mixed reaction in the United States. Critics argued that the implementation of such a project would negatively affect the US economy. Proponents, the most vocal of whom was Truman, argued that the United States would benefit many times over from the plan, particularly by reviving international trade and investment.

The Soviet Union indirectly contributed to the implementation of the Marshall Plan. In 1947, negotiations on this program were held in Paris, in which the United States took part. France, Great Britain and the USSR. USSR Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov defiantly left the meeting room. Official proposals to participate in this program were sent to absolutely all European countries, including Turkey, but excluding Franco’s Spain. Following the USSR, the countries of Eastern Europe refused to participate in the Marshall Plan. In February 1948, Czechoslovak communists carried out a coup d'etat, supported by the USSR.

As a result, US legislators decided that the rise of communists to power in Western Europe was a greater evil than the possible economic losses of the United States, and in April 1948, Congress approved this project - the Economic Cooperation Act was signed. For the first time in world history, the victorious power (the United States) did not collect reparations from the defeated powers, but provided them with large-scale economic assistance. In addition, the revolutionary nature of the strategy lay in the fact that European countries were asked to overcome the crisis not alone, but through joint efforts. Almost all states of Western Europe, which were outside the zone of Soviet influence, became participants in the Marshall Plan. The exceptions were Spain and West Germany (it joined the program in 1949 when it gained new statehood). It is curious that in Germany a special ministry was created that was exclusively involved in the implementation of the Marshall Plan.

The essence of the Marshall Plan was not only and not so much in the implementation of humanitarian projects. Some of the funds were provided free of charge, and some were provided as long-term loans with a low interest rate. The five main objectives, in addition to providing direct assistance to the poor, included: increasing labor productivity and the productivity of European industry and agriculture, achieving international financial stability, developing trade and developing a European economic cooperation. The injection of dollars into the economies of European countries allowed them to avoid hyperinflation and resume international trade and private investment, because most local currencies at that time were inconvertible. For example, investors from non-European countries (mainly American businessmen) were guaranteed that they would be able to convert profits into dollars at any time and freely export these funds.

A special mechanism for distributing American aid was created: the United States did not allow recipient states to spend these funds on “plugging holes” in state budgets. For example, 17% of all funds were spent exclusively on the purchase of industrial equipment and cars. Later in developed countries This principle has become the key for policy in relation to government borrowing: borrow to invest, and not to cover current expenses. The budget in this case is a two-story structure - taxes cover current expenses, and loans are used for capital investments. Then it is easier to repay the borrowed money, since it does not lie as a dead weight, but works. The German Constitution prohibits the use of borrowed funds for needs other than public investment and the fight against recession.

In addition, the receipt of assistance was made dependent on structural reforms carried out by recipient countries - reforms, in turn, aimed at fully encouraging free trade between European countries. Economist Barry Eichengreen, author of the study "The Marshall Plan: History of the Most Successful Structural Adjustment Program", came to the conclusion that thanks to the "Marshall Plan" Europe and the whole world avoided a large-scale economic crisis similar to the one that hit the world economy after the end of the First World War. In his opinion, the reason lies precisely in the collective efforts to overcome economic problems and begin the process of European integration - while after the First World War, European countries pursued the most stringent protectionist policies.

Imanuel Wexler, author of the book "European Recovery Program in Economic Perspective"\The Marshall Plan Revisited: The European The Recovery Program in Economic Perspective believes that the implementation of the Marshall Plan, in particular the introduction of American business practices to Europe, allowed the creation of modern European corporations that ensured the European economic boom of the 1960s. However, a number of researchers, for example, Michael Hogan, are confident that the Marshall Plan, which led to the “Americanization” of a number of spheres of European life, became the cornerstone of European anti-Americanism, which had never before manifested itself.

At the first stage of the Marshall Plan, American investments provided a significant portion of the gross domestic product (GDP) of European countries. For example, according to the American historian Charles Maier, in 1949, American injections provided more than 11% of Great Britain's GDP, almost 12% of France's GDP, 21.8% of Germany's GDP and 33.6% of Italy's GDP. During those years, the US spent 15% of its budget on foreign aid. However, already in 1950, European economies showed high growth rates. The level of industrial production in Europe exceeded the pre-war level by 40%, the level of agricultural production by 20%. Unemployment has dropped sharply. As a result, in 1951, the share of American economic assistance in Great Britain's GDP decreased to 2%, in France - to 7.8%, in Germany - to 6.8%, in France - to 8.7%.

British historian Alan Milward, author of the book "The Reconstruction of Western Europe 1945-1951", believes that Europe could independently get out of economic aid without dollar influences. However, this would have to pay a high price - in particular, introducing strict restrictions on food rations and using the savings to purchase food. Economist Daniel Barbezat believes that, among other things, the Marshall Plan made it possible to significantly reduce the pain of economic and political reforms carried out in Europe - in the recipient countries, “hunger riots” and other extreme manifestations of social discontent were avoided.

It is believed that the Marshall Plan completely changed the ideology of international relations. The main goal of the Marshall Plan was simple - to stabilize Europe. The implementation of the plan was accompanied by a propaganda campaign, one of the main slogans of which was “Prosperity will set you free.” Since then, the elimination of hunger and disease and the economic development of states have been considered one of the ways to prevent conflicts and turn former enemies into friends. British historian David Ellwood believes that the Marshall Plan had a tremendous psychological impact on the state of minds of Europeans. According to him, before the start of this project, apathy and despondency reigned in the business circles of European countries. Businessmen believed that it was useless to engage in business, because “the communists will come and take everything away.” After the United States demonstrated its interest in European affairs, the situation changed dramatically. In 1953, George Marshall received the Nobel Peace Prize.

The implementation of the Marshall Plan made it possible to create the military-political bloc NATO and the European Union. The genealogy of a united Europe, in fact, begins with the Economic Cooperation Administration, specially established for the distribution of American aid and joint projects. In the 1950s, this structure became the basis for the creation of the European Economic Community, which became the European Union.

The Marshall Plan is a program for the restoration and development of Europe after World War II by providing it with American economic assistance. Proposed in 1947 by J.C. Marshall, came into force in 1948. 17 European countries participated in its implementation. In 1951 it was replaced by the law “on mutual security”, which provided for the simultaneous provision of economic and military assistance.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

MARSHALL PLAN

so-called plan for the restoration and development of Europe after World War II, first put forward by the state. US Secretary J. Marshall in a speech at Harvard University on June 5, 1947. Was directed against Soviet Union and countries democracy, to preserve and strengthen in Western countries. Europe's authorities are monopolistic. bourgeoisie, whose positions were seriously undermined as a result of the 2nd World War, against the growth of the revolution. the struggle of the working class and liberation. movements in the colonies. M. p. set as its goal to promote the expansionist policy of the Amer. monopolistic circles, strengthening their positions in war-torn Europe, subordination of economic. development of Europe to the interests of the United States, involvement of Western countries. Europe in aggressive military., political. and economical US plans. M. p. and so-called The Truman Doctrine (see Truman Doctrine) were the main US programs that prepared the creation of an aggressive military. NATO bloc. At the suggestion of England and France, The provisions of the international law were discussed in 1947 at the Paris Meeting of Foreign Ministers. Affairs of the USSR, England and France. In contrast to the MP, the Soviet Union put forward proposals aimed at ensuring equal economic rights. cooperation taking into account national sovereignty of the state, but they were rejected by the app. powers. Sov. Union and countries democracies refused to participate in the implementation of the MP. 16 European countries agreed to participate in the MP. countries (England, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Austria, Ireland, Iceland, Greece, Turkey, Portugal, Switzerland), which have concluded a convention on the creation of the "Organization of European Economic Cooperation" , the task was to develop a joint “program for the restoration of Europe.” M. p. was also extended to the West. Germany. Started in April. 1948, when the US Congress passed the “Economic Cooperation Act,” which provided for a 4-year (until June 30, 1952) program of “economic assistance” to Europe. Congress refused to set a total appropriation for the entire program and decided to allocate certain amounts annually. For the first year of the program, $5.3 billion was allocated (about $4 billion was actually spent). The law provided for the conclusion of bilateral agreements, according to the Crimea of ​​Europe. The participating countries of the M.P. pledged to ensure the growth of production and finance. stability, cooperate with other countries in reducing trade. barriers, supply the US with scarce materials, submit regular reports on the use of Amer. "help", maintain and encourage private Amer. investments. The participating countries of the M.P. pledged to create a special one. funds in national currency, the disposal of which was controlled by the United States. All this made it possible for the United States to interfere in internal affairs. affairs of these countries and put pressure on them in the interests of the Americans. monopolies. To implement the economic policy, the Economic Administration was created. cooperation. A prominent American was appointed administrator. industrialist P. Hoffman, his specialist. A. Harriman became the representative in Europe. Specialists were sent to the participating countries (except Iceland and Switzerland). Amer. missions endowed with broad control rights not only over the use of “aid”, but also in relation to economic development of these countries as a whole. Assistance was provided from the US federal budget in the form of grants and loans. The law provided for delivery to Europe. countries primarily from American surpluses. goods (mainly agricultural surplus), and it was determined that 25% of all wheat supplies should be in the form of flour and that at least 50% of all transportation should be carried out to the US. courts The United States used M.P. to alleviate the situation of its economy, for wide penetration not only into the markets of a number of European countries. countries, but also their colonies. The M.P. administration guaranteed Amer. monopolies receive their foreign investments, as well as profits of up to 175%. In the event of expropriation or confiscation of Amer. companies, the government of the participating country of the M.P. provided for appropriate compensation to these companies. -***-***-***- Table. Bilateral agreements concluded by the United States with other countries under the so-called. Marshall Plan [s]PLANMARSHALL.JPG The annual consideration in Congress of the issue of new appropriations was a means of putting pressure on the participating countries of the M.P., which were always under the threat of reduction and even termination of “aid” to them. Congress adopted a decision in 1951, according to the National The US Security Council received the right to terminate the economic assistance to the states that supplied supplies to the USSR and other socialist. countries, if these supplies, in the opinion of the National. council, "harm the Americans. security." The implementation of the MP contributed to the penetration and consolidation of American monopolies in the markets of the countries participating in the MP, led to increased militarization of their economies and an increase in military spending. The military side of the MP gradually acquired an increasingly dominant character , especially after the creation of the aggressive North Atlantic bloc in 1949. The MP was increasingly used to implement purely military programs, largely thanks to the funds provided under the MP, general level military production in the participating countries of M. and. increased from $700 million in April. 1949 to $1.5 billion in April 1951. Total amount of appropriations for M. item since April. 1948 to Dec. 1951 amounted to about 12.4 billion dollars, with the main. the share fell on England ($2.8 billion), France ($2.5 billion), Italy ($1.3 billion), West. Germany ($1.3 billion), Holland ($1.0 billion). 30 Dec 1951 The M.P. officially ceased to operate and was replaced by the “Mutual Security Act” (adopted by the US Congress on October 10, 1951). Lit.: Leontyev A., Imperialism of the dollar in the West. Europe, (M.), 1949; Allen D., Marshall Plan. Recovery plan or military. plan., trans. from English, M., 1949; Claude A., The Marshall Plan, trans. from French, M., 1950; Perlo V., Amer. imperialism, trans. from English, M., 1951, Brown W. A. ​​and Opie R., American foreign assistance, Wash., 1953; Price H. V., The Marshall plan and its meaning, (N. Y., 1955). V. Larin. Moscow.

"MARSHALL'S PLAN"

Named for the US Secretary of State Marshall(q.v.), who first put forward this plan in his speech at Harvard University on June 5, 1947; along with the "Truman Doctrine" "P.M." was an expression of an aggressive, openly expansionist course foreign policy US ruling circles after the Second World War.

"P.M." was conceived by American diplomacy as a continuation of the Truman Doctrine.

“The Truman Doctrine” and “P.M.”, according to A. A. Zhdanov, “represent an expression of a single policy, although they differ in the form of presentation in both documents of the same American claim to the enslavement of Europe.” "P.M." more veiled than the Truman Doctrine. However, “the essence of the vague, deliberately veiled formulations of the “Marshall Plan” is to put together a bloc of states bound by obligations towards the United States, and to provide American loans as payment for the refusal of European states from economic, and then from political independence. At the same time, the basis of the "Marshall Plan" is the restoration of American-controlled monopolies industrial areas West Germany.

The “Marshall Plan,” as it became clear from subsequent meetings and speeches of American leaders, is to provide assistance primarily not to the impoverished victorious countries, America’s allies in the fight against Germany, but to the German capitalists in order to subjugate the main sources production of coal and metal for the needs of Europe and Germany, to make states in need of coal and metal dependent on the restored economic power of Germany" (A. A. Zhdanov).

Speaking at Harvard University, Marshall announced the United States' readiness to assist in the "restoration of Europe." At the same time, Marshall’s speech did not indicate either the conditions and extent of assistance that the United States could provide to European countries, or how real this assistance was.

The governments of England and France immediately took up the initiative. Marshall and proposed convening a meeting of the foreign ministers of the USSR, France and England to discuss his proposals.

At the meeting it became clear that the United States, without giving any information about the conditions and extent of the “aid” that it intends to provide to Europe, at the same time insisted on it. that a steering committee be created from representatives of the great powers, whose functions would include drawing up a comprehensive program for the "economic recovery and development" of European countries: this committee should have very broad powers in relation to the economic resources, industry and trade of European countries to the detriment of their national sovereignty. Since it was clear that the steering committee would become an instrument of the United States, with the help of which they would try to make the economies of European countries dependent on themselves, the Soviet delegation could not agree with the proposals of representatives of England and France (who played the role of US agents at the conference) to create this committee.

The Soviet delegation stated that first of all it was necessary to find out the reality of American loans, their conditions and sizes, then ask European countries about their loan needs and, finally, draw up a consolidated program of requests from European countries that could be satisfied with US loans. The Soviet delegation especially emphasized that European countries must remain masters of their economies and be able to freely dispose of their resources and surpluses. Due to the refusal of the British and French representatives to accept the Soviet proposals, the meeting of foreign ministers ended without result.

After this, the British and French governments, with the active support of the United States, decided to convene, without the participation of the USSR, a meeting of European countries that would agree to join “P.M.”

12-15. VII 1947 in Paris there was a conference of “European economic cooperation” with the participation of 16 countries that joined “P.M.”, namely: England, France, Austria, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

The conference created a "Committee on European Economic Cooperation", which was charged with preparing a report on the resources and needs of the countries participating in the conference for a period of 4 years, so that this report would be submitted to the US government.

The committee determined the total amount of funds needed to provide assistance under the P.M. at $29 billion and in the second half of September 1947 sent its report to Washington.

To consider this report, 3 special committees were organized in the USA, and highest value of them had the one headed Harriman(see) “Advisory Committee to the President of the United States on Foreign Assistance,” the report of which was published on November 8, 1947. The Harriman Committee reduced the amount of “aid” to Europe to 12-17 billion dollars for the next 4 years, which meant further reduction of the initial application submitted by the Committee of European Countries (prior to this decision of the Harriman Committee, the amount of the P.M. loan had already been significantly reduced at the request of the State Department). At the same time, the Harriman Committee unwittingly exposed the true goals of the American monopolists by recommending a significant increase in the share of “aid” intended for West Germany.

The question of approving allocations for the implementation of "P.M." was considered by the US Congress in February-March 1948, and in the initial draft of the law on the so-called. "foreign aid" significant changes were made during the discussion process. Congress refused to immediately allocate the funds required for the entire period of implementation of I.M., and limited itself to only approving amounts for the first year of its operation. Congress further reduced the amount of appropriations, bringing it to $5.3 billion over a period of 15 months. Finally, the law adopted by Congress made the conditions for receiving American “aid” even more burdensome for European countries.

Discussion "P.M." in Congress was marked by the decision of the House of Representatives to include Franco’s Spain among the countries receiving “aid” under “P.M.” Later, the mention of Francoist Spain, which caused outrage among the American and world democratic community, was excluded from the bill.

The Foreign Aid Act was signed into law by President Truman on April 3, 1948.

Following the adoption of this law, in accordance with its terms, a government administration was created in the United States to direct the provision of economic “aid”, headed by the major American industrialist Paul Hoffmann. Harriman was appointed US representative in Europe on issues related to P.M.

Law on the implementation of "P.M." provided for the conclusion by the participating countries of the “P.M.” bilateral agreements with the United States on the conditions under which American “aid” will be provided.

Such agreements were indeed concluded during the first half of 1948, and they included the following conditions:

a) Providing American goods with free access to Western European countries by unilaterally reducing customs tariffs in these countries.

b) Refusal of the governments of Western European countries from the nationalization of industry and the provision complete freedom private entrepreneurs.

d) US control over foreign trade countries that have joined "P.M." A ban on these countries trading with the USSR and people's democracies.

Using these agreements, American monopolies seek to turn European countries into consumers of industrial goods imported from the United States and to complicate the restoration and development of those industries in European countries that can compete with US industry. A typical example is a reduction under US pressure in the programs of the British and Italian shipbuilding industries. By directing the economic development of European countries along the path they wish, the United States ultimately achieves the establishment of permanent dependence of European countries on American industry, which should be the most important prerequisite for the political subordination of the “Marshalled” countries to the United States. One of the consequences of this is an increase in unemployment in these countries, as well as a decrease in wages and impoverishment of working people. In an effort to prevent the real development of industry in European countries (except for West Germany, which the United States intends to make the industrial base and arsenal of the aggressive bloc), the United States avoids importing into Europe industrial equipment, limited mainly to the import of food and consumer goods. Thus, American monopoly capital, implementing “P.M.”, sets as its goal to completely subjugate the Western European states and make them an instrument of its imperialist policy. Talk about the US desire to “help” the restoration of war-stricken peoples is just a smokescreen designed to mislead the workers of the “Marshalled” countries.

The United States is openly betting on the priority development of the economy of West Germany, whose industry is increasingly passing into the hands of the tycoons of American financial capital. The ruling circles of the United States began to especially actively pursue a policy of encouraging the growth of the military-industrial potential of Germany after the unification western zones occupation, they became the true masters of all of Western Germany, including the Ruhr region.

"P.M." has a pronounced anti-Soviet character, since the United States hoped, with the help of this plan, to break away the countries of people's democracy from the USSR and at the same time make "P.M." the basis of the anti-Soviet military-political bloc in Europe. The US attempt with the help of "P.M." splitting the anti-imperialist camp and driving a wedge between the USSR and the people's democracies failed. As for the “Western bloc,” it was formalized by the conclusion of the Brussels Pact on March 17, 1948, according to which 5 states - England, France, Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg - formed a political, economic and military union. Following this, at the direction of American diplomacy, on April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Pact was concluded in Washington. Not content with this, American diplomacy came up with plans to create other aggressive military alliances directed against the USSR and people's democracies - the Mediterranean bloc (whose participants should include Greece, Turkey and other countries of the Middle East), the Pacific bloc, etc. All of these are links widely a planned chain of military blocs that the reactionary ruling circles of the United States intend to use for their aggressive purposes, and the economic basis of these alliances should be the same “P.M.”, which is one of the most important weapons of American imperialism in its struggle for world domination.

Formally, the law on the implementation of "P.M." and the bilateral agreements concluded on the basis of this law between the United States and Western European countries do not contain any obligations of military cooperation, but in fact, countries receiving American “aid” are forced to provide the United States with naval and air bases on their territory and enter into military cooperation with them, etc. The Americans now already have an extensive network of bases in the French colonies, on the island belonging to England. Cyprus, Iceland, Spain, Greece, Turkey, etc.

Along with this, in bilateral agreements on "P.M." contains articles on the supply of strategic raw materials by European countries to the United States.

"P.M." It is also used by American intelligence for the purposes of legalized espionage, since “marshalled” countries are required to provide the United States with any information related to their economy.

"P.M." is in blatant contradiction with the vital interests of Western European countries. However, their reactionary ruling circles, trying to get US support in the fight against the democratic forces of their countries, are committing betrayal national interests and ultimately to the loss of the national sovereignty of their states.

"P.M." unable to bring the peoples of Western Europe a real recovery of their economies. As V.M. Molotov noted, American loans under "P.M." “did not give a real boost to industry in the countries of capitalist Europe. They cannot give this boost, since American loans are not intended to restore and boost the industry of European countries competing with the United States of America, but to ensure wider sales American goods in Europe and to make these states economically and politically dependent on the capitalist monopolies ruling in the United States and their aggressive plans, regardless of the interests of the peoples of Europe themselves."

On the other hand, the expansionist "P.M." also contradicts the genuine interests of the broad masses of the American people.

More than two years of action of "P.M." fully confirmed the position of the Soviet Union on this issue. "P.M." failed completely. Even its inspirers and organizers cannot hide this fact.

Diplomatic Dictionary. - M.: State Publishing House of Political Literature. A. Ya. Vyshinsky, S. A. Lozovsky. 1948 .

See what "MARSHALL PLAN" is in other dictionaries:

- (Marshall Plan), an American program for the recovery and development of the European economy (European Recovery Program) after World War II by providing assistance from the United States. The main goal The Marshall Plan was to improve the heavy... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

- (Marshall Plan) A major American aid program to help rebuild European countries after World War II. This plan was proposed by US Secretary of State George C. Marshall. During 1948 – 1951 USA... ... Economic dictionary

MARSHALL PLAN- so-called program restoration and development of Europe after the Second World War of 1939-1945 by providing it with economic “aid” from the United States. In fact, P.m. together with the Truman Doctrine represented component aggressive... ... Legal encyclopedia

Countries that received assistance under the Marshall Plan (the height of the red bar corresponds to the relative amount of assistance) ... Wikipedia

Countries that received Marshall Plan aid (the height of the red bar corresponds to the relative amount of aid). Marshall Plan (English Marshall Plan, official name of the English European Recovery Program “European Recovery Program”) ... ... Wikipedia

"Marshall Plan"- a program for the restoration and development of Europe, proclaimed by US Secretary of State J. Marshall on June 5, 1947. American aid was provided for $17 billion to 16 European countries. After World War II American model… … Geoeconomic dictionary-reference book

MARSHALL PLAN- (eng. Marshall Plan) – unofficial name(named after the US Secretary of State, General J. C. Marshall, who put forward it in 1947) of the American European Recovery Program. Based on Amer. Law “On Assistance to Foreign States” dated April 3... ... Financial and credit encyclopedic dictionary

70 years ago, the United States launched a massive offensive against Europe.

The US put forward the Marshall Plan as a program for rebuilding Europe after World War II

1945 Dresden after the Allied bombing. Ruins of the cathedral. Photo: Deutsche Fotothek/Richard Peter/TASS

On June 5, 1947, George Marshall, US Secretary of State, speaking at Harvard University, spoke about how Washington plans to revive EUROPE. This plan, which received the name of its creator, essentially became a signal for an economic attack on the “old continent”, which ended in the complete subjugation of Europe in the western part of the American economic and political machine.

RUSSIANS ARE COMING!

This speech by Marshall was a logical continuation of the speech of US President Harry Truman, which he delivered before the American Congress on March 12, 1947. Briefly, its essence: the Soviet Union is imposing its policies on European states, thus preventing Washington from establishing the concept of democracy in a liberated Europe. Consequently, it is necessary to pursue a “policy of containment”, counteracting the USSR and its national-patriotic allies in Europe. And for this, Truman asked Congress to allocate about 400 million dollars to help Greece and Turkey, which were allegedly under powerful pressure from the communists. In fact, the USSR then demanded that Turkey change the status of the Black Sea straits, and in Greece communist partisans actually came to power, making a significant contribution to the defeat of the Italian-German fascist troops. The Balkans were slipping away from the influence of the Anglo-Saxons, who for some reason traditionally considered the peninsula a zone of their interests.

The Marshall Plan essentially became economic form containment, in Western terminology, of communist expansion. The United States had reasons for this, and not only of Turkish-Greek origin. After the Victory of the Soviet Union in the Great Patriotic War Europe has sharply moved to the left. The highest moral authority of the USSR as the bearer of the communist idea led to the growth of the political influence of the communist parties, the majority of whose members also fought against fascism.

In Italy, as a result of the past elections, the Communist Party received 25 percent of the seats in parliament, in France - more than 30 percent. In Eastern Europe, in almost all countries, either communists or coalitions led by them came to power during elections, as in Poland and Czechoslovakia. A little more - and most of Western Europe could stand under the red banner. It was impossible to stop this process by military means, as the United States was accustomed to doing in Latin America, without risking the opposite result: combat-ready Soviet tank armies would have swept the occupation forces into the Atlantic in a matter of weeks. At the same time, the Soviet soldiers would be supported by the population in most cases. Sergei Shtemenko, one of the leaders of the General Staff in those years, recalled that “the mobilization plans of the General Staff provided for all possible scenarios for the development of events in Europe,” and Soviet marshals learned to fight win-win in Europe with a much stronger enemy than the stars and stripes who love blackmail on black markets and Coca-Cola.

On the other hand, the US monopolies were bursting with money: during the war years they earned at least $300 billion from the supply of weapons and food, according to modern rate- approximately 4.5 trillion dollars. By 1948, the US gold reserves had increased to 21 thousand 800 tons, which amounted to more than 70 percent of all the world's gold. But it is possible to transfer industry onto a peaceful footing under capitalist conditions only through a crisis, the signs of which began to appear more and more clearly in the American economy: given its scale, it threatened to become worse than the famous crisis of the early 30s.

We must pay tribute to Marshall, by the way, the former boss General Staff American army: the plan developed under his leadership provided that the main political and economic problems of post-war America would be resolved.

FROM THE METROPOLIS - TO THE COLONY

What was the essence of American “aid” to the destroyed European economy? The United States was ready to provide up to 20 billion dollars (actually 13.3 billion was allocated) to those countries that agreed with its plan for “economic recovery and development.” This assistance was to be carried out in accordance with bilateral agreements, but subject to several basic principles.

Firstly, it was mainly not about free money, which countries could dispose of as they wished, but about the so-called commodity loans - the United States sent products, cars, clothes, equipment and the like to Europe at its own discretion, thus selling considerable commodity reserves and buying time to restructure their economy. A third of the total amount, by the way, was spent on the purchase of American food, which made it possible to reduce US government subsidies to its farmers, who thus received considerable investment resources.

Other conditions were also far from charitable and strictly tied the European economy to the interests of US financial and industrial capital.
Recipient countries of “aid” were obliged to abandon the nationalization of industry, maintain freedom of private enterprise, create preferential treatment for American private investment, guarantee free access to American goods while simultaneously reducing customs duties unilaterally, introduce restrictions on trade with people's democracies, and so on. At the same time, the United States stipulated the right to build military bases on the territory of “blessed” countries.

This, by the way, became the basis for the unadvertised “military” part of the Marshall Plan, which ultimately led to the military integration of Western Europe into the NATO bloc a year after the US Congress adopted the Economic Cooperation Act, which launched the implementation of the Marshall Plan in April 1948. Let us note, by the way, that the defense expenditures of all recipient countries within NATO significantly exceeded financial assistance, which they received from the USA. So the Americans remained true to themselves: they sold unnecessary surpluses to Europe, received interest and profits from loans and credits, and in the end forced them to pay for their military expenses! In addition, by imposing a requirement for the repayment of loans in dollar form, the financial systems of European countries were tied to the dollar for a long time (only France, eighteen years later, abandoned the dollar equivalent and left the military organization of the NATO bloc).

In general, the Marshall Plan essentially placed European countries in the position of American colonies. The paradox was that France, the Netherlands, Belgium and other metropolises paid for American aid with raw materials from their overseas territories, which, however, could not stop the collapse of colonial empires: if the metropolis actually becomes a colony, then the colonies are naturally freed from dictate. National liberation wars followed in Indochina and Africa. By 1960, most colonial countries had gained independence. This can also be attributed to side effects Marshall Plan.

But let's go back to 1948, when American dollar blessings poured into Western Europe. On April 4, 1948, the US Congress, as already mentioned, approved a four-year program of economic assistance to Europe. The bulk of it, as one would expect, came from the UK ($2.8 billion), France (2.5), Italy and West Germany (1.3 each), and the Netherlands (1). In total, 17 countries received assistance, and 17 billion dollars were ultimately spent, which is equivalent, depending on the calculation method, to approximately 200-500 billion current dollars. At the same time, the Americans, through a specially created committee, strictly controlled the internal economic policy of the debtors, as well as their gold and foreign exchange reserves and the financial and credit system, which by that time was included in the Bretton Woods system and was completely dependent on the dollar.

West Germany, in addition to all the listed restrictions, was also forced to transfer its considerable gold and foreign exchange reserves to the American Fort Knox. The fate of these German resources is still shrouded in fog, which scandals and investigations that flare up from time to time cannot dispel. In any case, it is officially recognized that today less than a third of Germany's gold reserves are stored in the Bundesbank's Frankfurt vault.

In general, the Marshall Plan essentially put European countries in the position of American colonies."

STALIN SAID “NO”

Of course, in post-war Europe it was impossible to ignore the opinion of the Soviet Union and its allies when organizing such a large-scale action as restoring the continent’s economy. The USSR and Eastern European governments received an invitation to participate in the implementation of the Marshall Plan. Stalin initially reacted with interest to this proposal: the country, devastated by the war, undoubtedly needed financial and material resources.
But not at any cost, which was clearly and unambiguously stated in the instructions of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks for the delegation led by Vyacheslav Molotov, heading to Paris, where a meeting of the foreign ministers of Great Britain, France and the USSR opened on June 27, 1947. The topic is a discussion of Marshall's proposals.

The position of the USSR was determined largely by the opinion of academician Yevgeny Varga, which he outlined to Vyacheslav Molotov in a memo dated June 24: “The Marshall Plan, first of all, should be a weapon to mitigate the economic crisis, the approach of which no one denies in the United States... If in the interests of the United States it is necessary to give up billions of dollars worth of American goods abroad on credit to unreliable debtors, then we must try to extract maximum political benefits from this.” The seriousness of Soviet intentions is also evidenced by the fact that the ambassadors in Warsaw, Prague and Belgrade were given instructions to convey to the leadership of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, respectively, the desire to “take the initiative to ensure their participation in the specified economic activities (Marshall Plan - Ed.) and state their claims, bearing in mind that some European countries (Holland, Belgium) have already made such wishes.”

The meeting in Paris freed the Soviet leadership from illusions. Firstly, for the USSR it was unacceptable that American assistance was conditioned by the need to carry out the orders of the Economic Cooperation Administration, which actually determined not only domestic economic policy, but also received access to information about resources, the state of industry, scientific and technical developments, etc. Further. Secondly, the Marshall Plan was completely controlled by the United States and was carried out outside the framework and criteria of the UN, although there was a corresponding structure - the United Nations Relief and Reconstruction Administration, created on November 9, 1943 with the aim of providing assistance to countries affected by the war.

To top it all off, Vyacheslav Molotov received information on June 30 Soviet intelligence, in which it was reported that the leaders of the United States and Great Britain agreed to condition the provision of assistance to the USSR on its refusal of German reparations. This was completely impossible for the USSR, for which the only guaranteed source of foreign investment was captured supplies. On July 2, 1947, the Paris meeting ended with the refusal of the USSR delegation to participate in the implementation of the Marshall Plan. Following the USSR, the countries of Eastern Europe also refused to participate. Stalin said that the Paris conference was part of the West's plan to isolate the USSR.

It is noteworthy that one of the formal criteria by which the USSR was not eligible to receive American assistance was the fact that the Soviet budget did not have a deficit. This is after a bloody, destructive war, as a result of which it was lost
at least a third of the economic potential! Looking ahead, we note that both the USSR and its Eastern European allies restored their economies no later than the recipients of American aid. In the Soviet Union, rationing was abolished already in 1947, while Britain, which suffered much less, abolished rationing only in 1951.

...Four years passed quickly: the Marshall Plan officially ended on December 30, 1951. It was replaced by the Mutual Security Act, which the US Congress approved on October 10, 1951. This law, which officially recognized the division of Europe into zones of influence, already without any omissions provided for the possibility of the United States simultaneously providing its European satellites with both military and economic assistance. The subordinate role of the once world European powers was formalized.

Of course, this plan became one of the most successful projects American diplomacy. The United States has achieved all its goals, obvious and hidden. Let's list them briefly: the American dollar has become the main international currency in Europe; the influence of the communists and the USSR in Western Europe was weakened; The USA received a huge market for its products; created economic basis for the NATO military bloc; the US economy has received time and resources to adjust to peacetime operations; American monopolies received significant profits, which allowed them to modernize production and increase scientific and technical potential; the dependent position of the European allies made it possible to create the basis for foreign policy pressure on the Soviet bloc; a powerful NATO military infrastructure was created in American interests, and its maintenance was paid for by Western Europe.

The Marshall Plan, also known as the European Recovery Program, provided more than $13 billion to finance European economic development between 1948 and 1951. The Marshall Plan was successfully revived economic activity in the region and contributed to restoring the confidence of the European population in the future of their countries and Europe as a whole. The plan is named after Secretary of State George C. Marshall, who announced it at the outset of his speech at Harvard University on June 5, 1947.

It is interesting that Marshall proposed his plan not in Congress, but in front of students at Harvard University. He explained his idea in simple words: The European economy was destroyed because the Nazis reorganized it to support their war effort. Now the townspeople could not earn enough to afford to buy food from farmers. And farmers could not get the equipment they needed to produce food from the cities.

The Marshall Plan is known as the most successful foreign aid program in history. More than 60 years have passed since the secretary of state's speech at Harvard, which outlined the ambitious plan.

The Marshall Plan was designed to counter the spread of communism in Europe.Marshall's speech lasted only 12 minutes. Its content marked the transition to the post-war era and required significant changes. A few days later, the Secretary of State's recommendations became known as the Marshall Plan.However, historians still cannot reach a consensus as to how big the role was cash assistance The United States in the economic recovery of Europe.

Short speech, global idea

Marshall's speech lacked detail, but the powerful influence of his ideas, militarily and politically, left an imprint on Europe decades after the war.

The plan began two years after the Potsdam Conference.

After the war, the United States of America, which had a developed infrastructure and a thriving economy, confidently increased its pace of development. On the contrary, experts predicted financial and social collapse in Europe.

Marshall, future laureate Nobel Prize world, said at Harvard that his proposal was not directed against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, despair and chaos. He outlined his plan, based on the proposals of the Europeans and their faith in the economic future of their countries and Europe as a whole.

George Marshall argued that the United States must do everything possible to help restore economic development, without which there can be neither political stability nor peace.

Within weeks of the speech, European governments, led by France and Britain, began drawing up a Marshall spending plan. Essentially, the plan was to provide the required amount of hard currency to German importers.

resultsAndconsequences of the Marshall Plan

By the end of the Marshall Plan in 1952, within 5 years of Marshall's famous speech, the United States had invested more than $13 billion, about $100 billion today. About $1.4 billion of the original amount was spent on restoring Germany's infrastructure, which was nothing but ruins.

Germany was the 4th largest recipient of US aid.The US offer of assistance was made to all European countries. Among the largest recipients of aid, in descending order, were the UK, France, Italy and Germany. Moscow, according to American historians, set the tone for the upcoming cold war with a clear “no” that prohibited Eastern European countries from benefiting from the largesse of the Western benefactor.

No one doubts that the Marshall Plan contributed to the division of Europe from the rest of the world. Washington's intentions were simple: only the economic prosperity of Western Europe would resist the onslaught of communism. The Marshall Plan helped starving Europe become a reliable partner for the United States.

However, all success cannot be attributed solely to the drafters of the Marshall Plan. According to Professor Michael Hogan, a well-known Marshall Plan specialist, the contribution from local sources of capital amounted to 80-90% of all aid provided to large European countries during the first 2 years after the launch of the recovery program. However, the Marshall Plan provided the critical supply of support that would make European local assistance possible. Thanks to US support, imports to European countries, capital costs have increased, and succeeded in suppressing inflation, Hogan wrote in a document commemorating the 50th anniversary of Marshall's speech.

All these consequences led to increased productivity, improved trade and for a long period truce and prosperity in modern European history.

Marshall Plan now

Some politicians and economists have considered creating new program Marshall Plan, but applicable to Iraq or Balkan countries.

The ideals and goals of the Marshall Plan have been repeatedly emphasized by prominent figures concerned with the reconstruction of regions torn by crisis or political turmoil in Latin America, the Balkans and Iraq.