Külpolitika - A Magyar Külügyi Intézet elméleti-politikai folyóirata - 1982 (9. évfolyam)
1982 / 4. szám - A tanulmányok orosz és angol nyelvű kivonata
József Balázs: Yalta, Potsdam and current international relations Controversy concerning the Yalta—and to some degree the Potsdam—agreement is as old as the agreements themselves. Both were concluded with the full consent of the Allied leaders making up the anti-fascist coalition. They referred to the total defeat of Nazi Fascism and to a new post-war political structure for Europe and the world. French governments opposed the agreements from the start since they were not a party to them. The discussion in the West concerning the interpretation of the validity of the Yalta agreement revived again—and not only in France—in connection with recent events in Afghanistan and Poland. These however merely serve as excuses for questioning the present validity of Yalta. It is not true, as maintained in the West, that the three Big Powers did not agree at Yalta. They did. All the same Yalta can only be properly understood in conjunction with Potsdam. The two agreements are closely connected. The February 4th to nth 1945 Yalta Conference and the July 17th to August 2nd Potsdam Conference dealt essentially with three questions: the future of defeated Germany, general arrangements for Europe, and the foundations of the United Nations Organization. In the light of history not even Yalta is an eternal agreement of unchanging validity. It will only lose its validity for current politics, however, once the process of peace and security in Europe—including the military factor and its institutionalisation—has progressed to a degree where no one doubts the political or social legitimacy of the two systems. Pál Nemes: On the international situation and Hungarian foreign policy The article begins by summing up the world situation arguing that tension is waxing and détente is waning. The chief cause is that leading circles in the U.S. have reexamined their country’s relation to détente, switching to a policy which in many respects ressembles that of the Cold War. Western hopes concerning détente were disappointed. The socialist countries were not softened up, and they were not forced to re- tteat, on the contrary their strength and political influence grew significantly, though there were developments as well which were unfavourable for them. The new American policy expresses the interests of the military-industrial complex. The central aim is calling a halt to progress, lining up as many forces as possible in the confrontation with socialism, in order to maximise profits. The most dangerous aspect is rearmament designed to create superior military power. The new foreign policy line cannot achieve, its basic objectives since it lacks a sufficiency of resources, as well as offending the interests of America’s allies in many respects. In time the facts of life will come to the top. The second part of the article expounds Hungarian foreign policy which is centred on peace and security. In order to achieve our aims we must actively engage in political activity, exploiting every chance open to us, as well as closely collaborating with our allies. We can contribute to furthering peace and security helping to solve world-wide international problems, dousing seats of tension and extending bilateral relations with developed capitalist countries. The major lines of Hungarian foreign policy remain unchanged and it is only natural that we should pay closest attention to our ties with the Soviet Union. Within the developed capitalist world Western Europe is particularly important to us. In conclusion the article argues a position concerning a number of issues of theory and politics that are connected with the author’s judgement of the world situation. He rejects an over-pessimistic estimate of the dangers of war but argues nevertheless that readiness on the part of the U.S. to start certain important negotiations does not imply that the new line has been abandoned. He establishes that this is the fruit of capitalist class interests and pro- fit-centredness in the first place, and not of subjective factors. He criticizes those who maintain that defence was the essence of that American policy which has led to international tension becoming more acute, and that it is no longer possible to curb the impetus of rearmament. Finally the article discusses the nternational balance of power and the conclusions that can be drawn from it. István Dobosi: Security of supply of raw materials and fuel in the capitalist countries From the Second World War to the early 1970s, that is the oil price explosion, the developed capitalist countries were primarily concerned with ensuring effective demand. Multinational and national firms in the U.S., Great Britain, France and Italy had a major role in this. The dependence of developed capitalist countries on supplies grew considerabVI
