Churchill-FDR/Truman-Stalin

FDR, Churchill,and Stalin had a 3 way relationship, but there were the private connections also. FDR and Churchill got very close, Stalin and Churchill talked 'real politic' together without much trust, Stalin and FDR seemed to trust each other, to some extent. At the end of the war FDR suddenly died and Truman took over US policy. Did he fall under the English-speaking spell of the experienced Churchill and set the 'cold war' on it's path by making the paranoid Stalin see it as 2 to 1?

 

That is an interesting question, though I think that the Cold War was inevitable. The Soviet Union's alliance with the West was one of necessity and politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. Ideological differences had driven a wedge in that relationship long before FDR and Churchill were at the helm of the US and England.

Truman was certainly a no nonsense individual and I'm certain lacked many of the diplomatic skills that FDR had, however, I just don't think enough time had passed to change Stalin's mindset in the post-war. Seems to me by the time of the Yalta Conference he had already cemented creating a buffer zone between Western Europe and the Soviet Union. After all, not even a year had passed since the ending of the war when Churchill delivered his "Iron Curtain" speech in March, 1946.

 

I agree the Cold War was most likely unavoidable; but to speculate...

Churchill delivered the "Iron Curtain" speech and his link to Stalin was always rocky. The "dirty little paper" (didn't he call it this?) where he and Stalin divided Eastern Europe, Greece to the West and no mention to Poland. I doubt these two ever trusted each other. Stalin must have known about the '42 vs '44 Second Front conflict between the Western Allies. He knew about the A-Bomb and must have really disliked Truman being cagey about it.

Trosky wanted to spread communism quickly to other lands and Stalin wanted communism to consoladate (if I remember the Revolution history right). Stalin did pull out of Austria and I think it took some time for Czechoslovakia to fall to the Reds. Also- Stalin made peace with Finland, I don't think he really had to do that. It bothers me that this paranoid expansionist didn't fit the common view of him at these times. It all seems funny.

 

FDR wanted to trust Stalin, but I have little faith he trusted FDR. Rather he thought he understood FDR and knew what he could get from him and what he could not. There would never be the level of trust between Truman-Churchill that there was between FDR-Churchill. Churchill and FDR came from a much more similar backgrounds while Truman was a Mid-westerner and of a very different mind set with a different world view.

 

Seems very much on the mark, but for FDR and Churchill there was one real rub. FDR was opposed to imperialism and Churchill did not become PM to preside over the dismemberment of the British Empire. FDR would not do anything to hurt, I'm sure, but I doubt he'd help. As I said, I think we have to assume Stalin knew everything.

Another possible thread --- Did Stalin's failure to listen to his spies in 1941 lead to his reliance on them afterward?

 

I do not believe Stalin was ever trusted.....evidence is that we had to hurry with the A Bomb over Japan to keep Stalin from his plans to become a player there....one reason for us to hurry besides our need to end the war. One factor people rarely think about, unless you read what the people around FDR had to say about FDR's health as he traveled to meet with the big three.......his health may have opened the door to Stalin's opportunistic actions. FDR was experiencing health problems with great fatique--study the look on his face during these times. MacArthur, did not like Stalin or his plans, Patton spoke ill of him as well so I figure they(U.S. leadership) did the best they could.......keep in mind Truman was not kept up to speed as he was not liked by FDR but was around because of the votes he attracted as a pick for Vice President. Truman was never treated like he was going to be involved in government by FDR. He certainly rose to the task, but Stalin was already making big strokes toward his own goals. Truman performed great when you realize all of the situation, and actually seemed to have a natural distrust of Stalin.

 

I believe we pressed Stalin to enter the war on Japan. He attacked exactly 3 months after VE Day, as he'd promised. Stalin claimed he needed the time to transfer troops, but yes he wanted in on the peace (didn't the Russians get back some islands lost in 1905?). Both Patton and MacArthur were redophobes. (new word ) MacArthur used lots of force against the "red" bonus army and Patton wished to fight in Europe. (not sure but Patton got into trouble for this?) Truman was kept in the dark on everything. I suspect it had a lot to do with trust, he rose to power through the corrupt Penderghast Machine and FDR took him on for political reasons to the dismay of many. (Truman was not corrupt, as his war investigations of contracts clearly showed). Stalin, by this time had a real spy network and knew pretty much everything, including Truman's feelings for him.
Could Stalin have felt betrayed, asked to attack Japan, and then left to get very little?

Knowing what we do of him it's funny to cast him as a victim, but he still seems to have respected FDR.

 

I don´t think Roosevelt and Churchill were anymore that "close" towards the end of war when it came to trusting Stalin. Roosevelt was 100% Stalin was trustworthy while Churchill was telling FDR not to trust him. This led to separate deals about "sharing" Europe. I recall Churchill made a separate deal with Stalin on a piece of paper of the Balkans, and FDR was not backing the Polish question that was important to Churchill. later on FDR seemed like realizing that Stalin was not keeping his promises of " free Europe" or it was Stalin´s idea of Europe, as communistic puppet governments started ruling Eastern Europe countries and not governments that were elected by free elections. The famous 100% voting of the communistic parties. So Stalin had created the Buffer zone all the way to Central Europe, and was not letting go. Personally I think there was fault in both sides but then again the political differences were so enormous it was not hard to see it happen.

 

I, personally wonder at just how much influence Churchill had upon the "newly sworn in" President Truman since he had only held that position since mid-April of ’45, and the two met for the first time in Potsdam just a week before Churchill was replaced by Atlee in late July. Love him or hate him, Truman was an independent cuss who didn’t mince words or worry about ruffling feathers. While Truman was the only President of the twentieth century who couldn’t afford to attend college, and never tried for a military school like Eisenhower from neighboring Kansas, and his education stopped at High School, he was no dunce, and had fought in WW1 as a Captain of Artillery.

He was none the less an avid reader of history and other non-fiction books, plus he had the courage of his convictions and not easily swayed by others. When he and his Jewish partner went out of business in the mid-twenties, Truman didn’t declare bankruptcy as his partner Jacobson did to escape this debt, Truman spent more than a decade paying off his debts. The last wasn’t cleared until the mid-1930s.

He might have come up using and being used by the Pendergast political machine in Missouri, one of Pendergast’s relatives had served with Truman in the National Guard and recommended him, he defied the man and in many areas which rather "ticked off" Tom Pendergast. Especially in his dealing with Pendergast backed construction contractors in Missouri. He wouldn’t accept "false/inflated bids" on construction projects even when "advised" to do so, and wouldn’t bow to the pressure of "Boss" Pendergast. When Pendergast was found guilty of tax evasion, Truman lamented that it looked like everybody in Jackson County got rich except him.

FDR had concluded (incorrectly) that if he dealt with Stalin in a certain way, Stalin would allow a form of true representative governments to exist in Eastern Europe. He is quoted, in response to an advisor telling him Stalin was not to be trusted as saying; "I just have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. ... and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask for nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace." (Wilson D. Miscamble, From Roosevelt to Truman: Potsdam, Hiroshima, and the Cold War; 2007, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521862442)

This is an example of FDR being incorrect and mis-reading a political reality, one of the few errors in this area FDR ever had. Truman surely viewed Stalin with a less favorable eye than FDR had done, and without knowing about the "percentages agreement" (between Churchill and Stalin) during the Oct. 1944 meeting between the two. This "note" rather officially divided eastern Europe up between the west and the Soviets in "influence" in the areas. While FDR was not present, he was informed of the meeting and its outcome by Ambassador Harriman, and agreed in general and didn’t challenge or try to alter it at the Yalta Conference in Feb. of 1945.

When FDR got Stalin to agree to join the war in the Far East against Japan, specifying it would be three months after the war ended in Europe, he did so by giving Stalin a number of concessions, one being Soviet participation in the proposed United Nations, recognizing a number of Soviet Union states as individual nations, giving them seats at the UN in the General Assembly, and allowing both Manchuria and Mongolia to become separated from Chinese influence/domination. Of course when this was concluded at Yalta, the atomics were a "possibility" and the Red Army would/might most likely be needed to put Japan to the final end.

To put a "period" at the end of my ramble, I seriously doubt that Churchill had near the influence on Truman some assume, and the "Cold War" was a going to happen in one form or the other. Stalin didn’t wish to expand Communism until it was solidified in the "motherland", and its bordering nations as a buffer. He (Stalin) was very displeased with the way Berlin was being administered, hence the Berlin Blockade, feeling this was a "cancer" in the midst of the Communist State. This was an example of Stalin making a major political error like FDR did on the other "side", this exposed the East German state, and other east European state in the Soviet Block as puppets of Moscow and the Kremlin.

Just my take on this, so take it for what its worth.

 

Darn Good post! Having dealt with the Pendergast Machine I suspect Truman understood a Stalin better than FDR.

 

I'm speechless, how anyone (let alone a President) could believe this is really perplexing.

 

An idea of Stalins mindset in 1945, I would find it hard to believe he only had this idea late in the war and was pushed even slightly towards the cold war.

Stalin April 1945

The agreement about Poland was basically acknowledging this fact, unless the Allies (who went to war with Germany over Poland) were willing to fight the Soviet Union to allow Poland to choose its own Government Poland was always going to have a communist government Even if elections had been held by the Soviets there would be no way to guarantee they were a true reflection.

Stalin 1923

FDR had always seemed to look at Stalin in a favourable way.

 

You state the question very clealy. FDR trusted Stalin. Churchill did not, but made "the dirty little paper" on Eastern Europe. Stalin supported the 'communism in one nation' concept, and he had to fight 'irregulars' in the Ukraine for a time after the war ended. If FDR lived ,without Truman who didn't trust Stalin, would the paranoid Stalin have acted like he did? He did pull out of Austria, Czechoslovakia took a time to go 'red', Tito was never really under Stalin. I agree something would have probably happened, but it's an interesting question.

On the 3 UN seats, Stalin argued that the US, UK, and Fr would vote as a block always and he wanted an equal voice. Since the real power is in the Security Council and the USSR and the West were both there with a veto it seemed quite simple to give him his wish.

 

History channel recently covered Churchill/Stalin's agreement to divide certain nations of East Europe usually 90/10 or 10/90 as accepted levels of Russo-English or English/Russo dominance, that the U.S. was not made aware of----is that what is referred to as the dirty little paper? This was a reflection of the Imperialism that sometimes was revealed in English/others views of how they perceived themselves to be vs. others of the free world. This clearly signaled East Europeans that England was little better than Russia in it's views of self determination for the smaller entities.

 

I think it is really called the "nasty little note" or something, and while FDR wasn't present he was informed of the Tolstoy Conference in Oct. of 1944 in Moscow by the Ambassador, I think it was Harriman then. While the question of Poland wasn't discussed, all the other eastern bloc nations were, and they were "accorded" percentages of influence by either the Soviets or the west. FDR didn't participate, but he was aware of it and saw no reason to challenge it later at Yalta early the following year. The British were mostly concerned with keeping the Communists out of Greece and restoring the monarchy there, remember the king who had fled was related to the sitting monarchs in Great Britain, and the future queen (Elizabeth) would marry the son of that king.

If you goto this site, and scroll down to the Tolstoy section, you can find the typed letter between Harriman and FDR showing that FDR had been informed of the division of eastern Europe by the two on Oct. 11th, 1944

Goto:

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/wc-unity.html

It is a bit difficult to read, even when you expand it, but it does lay out the basics of the percentages document.

 

This is just a "quick and dirty" from Wiki, though it cites its references. I believe that this demonstrates FDR had already begun to change his thinking about Stalin, prior to his death.

Yalta Conference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Thanks for the added information.....so much to be learned in studying these materials.

 

The Western powers hated Communism and they thought Stalin was a bigger threat than Hitler (before the war). There is a reason they kept appeasing Hitler. In some circles Hitler was looked at in a role to "keep Stalin in check" and the savior of the market economy. And this was from a book written by a Jewish guy.