Tehran conference: preparation, goals, outcome. Briefly and to the point about the Tehran conference Proceedings of the Tehran conference 1943

On November 28, 1943, the famous conference began in Tehran, at which the leaders of the three great powers, Joseph Stalin, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, decided the "fate of the world." How it happened, tells the director of the Center for International Studies of the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor Anatoly Ivanovich Utkin.

The article is based on the material of the program "The Price of Victory" by the radio station "Echo of Moscow". The broadcast was hosted by Vitaly Dymarsky and Dmitry Zakharov. You can read and listen to the full original interview here.

In late November - early December 1943, the allies of the United States, Great Britain, the Soviet Union (more precisely, the leaders of these three great powers) gathered together for the first time in the war years in Tehran.

There is a separate story about the choice of location. It is known, for example, that Franklin Roosevelt did not want to go to Tehran. He was more satisfied with Cyprus, North Africa. At the last moment, the conference was even threatened with disruption because the president wanted Basra. Why not Tehran? To begin with, in 1910 England and France divided Iran into two parts - north and south. And in early 1941, the British and Russians entered Iran. That is, northern Iran, including Tehran, was completely the zone of influence of Russia. The American president did not like this very much - he was working, as it were, on foreign territory. And he worked doubly, because he was settled on the territory of the Soviet embassy. Only the first night he spent at the American embassy, ​​and then agreed: after all, the tsarist embassy was gorgeous, it was closer to the center, closer to the British embassy, ​​and besides, Stalin also offered Roosevelt a central building, and he himself lived in a small neighboring building. apartment.

Many historians consider Tehran to be the pinnacle of the anti-Hitler coalition

An important aspect in this story is the issue of security, because the Soviet embassy in Tehran, the former tsarist one, was essentially a citadel, and Stalin had significantly more people with a gun than Roosevelt could bring with him. That is, as if everyone perfectly understood that there was a danger of an assassination attempt, and it was practically impossible to commit it on the territory of the Soviet embassy, ​​to put it mildly. The only thing that did not suit Roosevelt was that the frogs croaked very loudly under his window, interfered with sleep. In the end, the embassy security resolved this issue radically, the president no longer complained.

In general, this great man had his own oddities. For example, he loved blue, but he hated nothing green, hated closed rooms, air conditioners, and so on. There is a lot to talk about here.

Be that as it may, Roosevelt settled in the Soviet embassy. English was nearby, so positioning was convenient. But nevertheless, a significant part of the meetings took place precisely on our territory, in the central room of the Soviet embassy. Heavy dark carpets, large chairs ... And, of course, Stalin proposed Roosevelt as the chairman of the conference.

Joseph Stalin, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill in Tehran, 1943

The Tehran Conference entered the history of World War II as a meeting at which the issue of opening a second front was finally settled. The leaders of the three countries agreed that the landing would take place in May 1944. This ultimately happened on June 6, 1944 in Normandy.

There were again long discussions about the place, but at the very end of the conference, Roosevelt and Stalin managed to change the mood of Churchill, who constantly spoke about Yugoslavia, the Balkans, the fate of Italy, that it was possible to go to the Pannonia valley, that is, he tried in every possible way to find alternatives landings in the north of France.

How can this be explained? The fact is that in those days, all the strength of Great Britain was in its fleet, which simply had to own the Mediterranean. If you remember what happened a year later, in October 1944, when Stalin and Churchill were negotiating, then, so to speak, the British minister asked for himself exactly Greece, since this gave him access to the Balkans, to which Great Britain has always been not indifferent.

The place of the conference - Tehran - was determined by Joseph Stalin

Let's say a few words about the reason for convening this conference, because it happened at the end of November 1943 for a reason. When the Soviet army crushed the Germans, or rather, did not let them through fifteen lines of defense near Kursk and Orel, Stalin said the words that are often quoted: "We will do it ourselves." These words sounded like a death knell for all plans for the unification of Western Europe, metropolises, and so on. If Stalin thought that the Red Army could crush Germany and enter Europe as a whole, then it turns out a situation in which England is again a "little ship".

Of course, this is very important for the position of the United States and Great Britain, but why then did Stalin agree to a second front? To answer this question, it is enough to imagine the losses of the country by this time. After all, there was a situation when the Red Army withdrew to Stalingrad. There were 110 million left. Half of the population was occupied. Hitler still had 400 million there in Western Europe. It seemed that the Soviet Union had no chance. And so he appeared for the first time, such a glare, and Stalin was simply afraid. The losses would be gigantic if the Red Army went to Berlin on its own path, without the help of the West, and so on. With all this, there is another very important point here, which, unfortunately, many people forget when it comes to the second front.

At the very beginning of the war, the first attempt to land was at Dieppe. Very unfortunate, very bloody. A relatively small contingent was landed, several thousand people, mostly Canadians, whom the Germans quickly entered into and simply destroyed. It was a kind of call. After that, it became clear that it was absolutely pointless to land in small groups on the scale of a division, several divisions. The landing will be effective only when absolute superiority is achieved.

In order for the landing to be exactly this, it was necessary to accumulate gigantic human and military-technical resources. And to do this even within a year was unrealistic. To fly a million people across the ocean is a very difficult task. At one time, Hans von Luck, speaking of American troops, said: “Never underestimate the Americans. If you hit them today, they will sit down, think and hit you a thousand times harder tomorrow. " And the Americans acted both then and afterwards in exactly this way. That is, if you are to land in Europe, then you need to have such an advantage over the German forces in France that they could not even gasp. Therefore, blaming the Allies for not landing in 1942, in 1943, may not be worth it - they simply did not want a repeat of Dieppe.

At the same time, one should not forget what the Allies were doing in the period between the once again given promise in Tehran and, in fact, the landing in Normandy. They captured Sicily, landed in the south of the Italian "boot", by their pressure overthrew Mussolini, forced Italy to capitulate. So the first ally of Germany on the European continent fell into oblivion.

Soviet delegation at the Tehran conference, 1943

But back to the Tehran Conference. I wonder if Roosevelt proposed to Stalin to divide the world without England's participation? Were there any separate negotiations in this troika? No, it never happened. If we characterize the geopolitics of President Roosevelt, he would like England to watch Europe, and America would watch England; so that Russia is watched by 400 million China, while America helps weak China. In this situation, the United States would have the keys to the world.

There were two important geopolitical issues. First, Roosevelt was categorically against leaving the zones of influence with the European metropolises. And secondly, he wanted China's importance to be raised, so that China would become one of the four "policemen" in the world.

The main issue at the Tehran conference was the question of opening a second front

Curiously, how did the leaders of the three great powers get to Tehran? It is known that Stalin arrived by plane, but with one landing. He sat down in Baku, where the leaders of Soviet aviation approached him: the commander of aviation, Marshal Novikov, and the commander of heavy bomber aviation, Golovanov, who offered him two flight options to choose from. According to the first, Stalin flew to Tehran together with Colonel General Golovanov, as for the second option, the colonel unknown to the world had to bring Stalin to the conference on his plane. And then the "father of nations" noted that generals rarely fly, and sat down with the colonel. Joseph Vissarionovich traveled by train to Baku. The way back was the same. Yes, it is worth saying that these carpets, which so surprised Churchill and Roosevelt, were, of course, from Moscow hotels (then this "trick" will be repeated in Yalta, and so on).

How did Roosevelt and Churchill get there? What did Churchill not want? Churchill did not want a bilateral US-Soviet meeting. And so when it was nevertheless decided that he would also be present, the British minister exulted, even wrote poetry. In general, it was a flight to Cairo, because on the twentieth of November 1943, the Cairo Conference took place. There, unlike Tehran, the Chinese were present, there was Chiang Kai-shek, who, as many say, behaved obsequiously. And, of course, Churchill and Roosevelt understood that Stalin did not like it when the Western allies agreed among themselves before meeting with him. This can largely explain the behavior of Churchill during this meeting, who all the time wanted to show that they had no a priori agreement.

The Big Three leaders celebrate the British minister's birthday. Tehran, 30 November 1943

And the German leadership? What was his reaction? We will not focus on this topic, we will only note that at least one attempt to kill all three was made. A certain Schultz, whose last name was Belyaev, a major in the Abwehr and a major in Soviet intelligence, introduced by Germany in 1930, noticed that he was in the zone of suspicion. Then he spoiled the transmitter, Soviet fighters shot down the plane, which was full of machine guns.

It should also be said that the materials of the conference came to Hitler with lightning speed, literally on the second day, because a certain Cicero was a lackey of the British ambassador in Ankara. He took out the keys from the sleeping ambassador, opened the safe and read all the materials. This data was sent to Berlin, so Hitler had a complete understanding of what awaits him in case of defeat.

But the Germans did not act very well in relation to Cicero, at least in that they paid him with counterfeit pounds sterling. And when, after the end of the war, the poor man decided to retire and buy a house, he was seized and sent to prison. There was a whole tragedy when Cicero turned to Germany with the words: "I worked for your nation, for you, for eternal Germany, and you repaid me with this."

The foundation of the UN was laid at the Tehran Conference of 1943

A very important point, which cannot be ignored, is the usual phrase that "at the Tehran conference the foundations for the redivision of the world in the post-war years were laid." As far as we know, Roosevelt insisted that Germany be divided into five parts, into five separate states. And these states were even named. For example, in the south there was to be a union of Hungary, Austria and Bavaria. Prussia was to be destroyed completely. Which is exactly what happened.

But not only the foundations of the post-war redistribution, but also the post-war organization were laid in Tehran. Roosevelt came with a certain scheme (the prototype of the United Nations), according to which somewhere 10-11 large states were supposed to observe how the world behaves. The police committee (the prototype of the Security Council), according to the plan of the American president, consisted of four states: the United States, Great Britain, the Soviet Union and China.

“But what about France? When did she join the Big Three? " - this begs the question. Winston Churchill fought like a lion for France. He understood that they have a common destiny. Many people did not like Charles de Gaulle, but they understood that if France goes down, the same will happen to all of Western Europe. Therefore, by agreement at the Yalta Conference, France also received a zone of occupation, and not just anywhere, but in West Berlin.

Presentation of the sword of Stalingrad during the Tehran conference, 1943

At the very moment when the leaders of the Big Three were meeting in Tehran, the Cold War began. She had not yet shown herself, but her ghost was already on the horizon. What happened? When the great fascist council deprived Benito Mussolini of power and Field Marshal Badoglio again became in power, the question arose: how to govern Italy? This was not agreed in detail. In principle, it was clear that a military group would be created, consisting of American, British and Soviet generals. And so it happened. Stalin sent his general. And here (attention!) What happens. It's September 1943. Churchill feared this situation most of all, who knew that there were two million communists in Italy, and if they applied to the Soviet embassy, ​​Italy would collapse for the West, disappear.

So, the Soviet general was offered a villa with wine, with all kinds of entertainment in war and non-war times. And it turned out to be a way out. But history, as you know, is insidious: exactly one year later, namely on August 23, 1944, Soviet troops entered Bucharest, and almost automatically the British and French sent their generals. Then Stalin invites them to the Carpathians to walk, relax, to villas and so on.

Thus, the embryo of the Cold War arose: how to govern the states that are liberated? Later, Stalin said: “I gave you France, Italy, Greece. Why are you taking Hungary away from me? " In general, Stalin managed to impose his will on both Roosevelt and Churchill: he did not give up either the Baltic states, which is known to have become part of the Soviet Union, or the western regions of Ukraine and Belarus.

Here we must not forget about the Polish question, which was discussed at the conference rather vigorously. Stalin had a phenomenal trump card. (Let's go back to the beginning, on the first day of the conference, remember some details). The Soviet leader was 1.59 m, large in shoulders, with a large, beautiful head. Roosevelt in a wheelchair was about the same height ... In general, even that mattered. Let us recall the words of Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, who, talking with the Polish government in exile in London, said: “Well, well, we will mobilize our forces, we will try, so to speak, to liberate Poland, the Red Army plus the British army. But you can imagine that the Russians will immediately put forward twice as powerful forces that we cannot win here. We are creating a state for you, where from the center to the border there will be 500 km everywhere. These are the best borders in Europe. You will get a huge slice of Germany. "

But at the peak moment, when everything was being decided, when his eyes were shining, Stalin asked for a ten minute break. With Molotov, they brought out a mossy, old map, which at one time, in 1920, was sent to Moscow from the West. It was a map with the Curzon Line, the British Foreign Secretary at the time. And Stalin said words to which it was difficult to oppose anything: “Do you think that we are less patriots than Lord Curzon, who considered this border a national division of borders? We agree to retreat 5-10 km to the east, but we cannot categorically reject Curzon. " This was a powerful argument.

At the Tehran Conference, Stalin said words that he never repeated. He said that "the current war is a war of motors." “The Americans produce 8-10 thousand planes a month, we produce 3 thousand planes, the British 3.5 thousand planes. This is a war of motors, and we won it only because our great ally, the United States of America, helped us. "

On November 28 - December 1, 1943, a conference of the leaders of the three allied states of the anti-Hitler coalition took place in Tehran (Iran): Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR Joseph Stalin, US President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

The meeting went down in history as the Tehran Conference. For the first time, the "Big Three" - Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill - gathered there for the first time.

Military decisions stated that Operation Overlord would be undertaken during May 1944, along with an operation in Southern France, with Soviet troops launching an offensive at about the same time to prevent the transfer of German forces from the east to the western front. It was envisaged that the military headquarters of the three powers must henceforth maintain close contact with each other regarding the forthcoming operations in Europe, and that a plan to mystify and deceive the enemy in relation to these operations must be agreed upon between these headquarters.

The Western allies, on the basis of their military-strategic plans in Southeast Europe, proposed to expand assistance to the Yugoslav partisans and involve Turkey in the war against Germany.

Operation Overlord. The landing of the allied forces in Normandy. June 1944

At dawn on June 6, 1944, the waters of the English Channel resembled a boiling cauldron. 6 thousand warships and transport ships moved from the ports of Great Britain to the shores of France, the roar of 11 thousand aircraft shook the air, hundreds of thousands of aerial bombs, shells of naval guns fell on German positions on the coast of Normandy. Parachute assault forces descended from heaven to earth and entered the battle on the move. The marines landed on the shore. The "longest day" began - the landing of the Anglo-American expeditionary forces on the western coast of the European continent - the territory of North-West France ("The Longest Day" is a novel by the American journalist Cornelius Ryan, written in 1959. It tells the story of "D-Day" , the first day of Operation "Overlord" for the landing of the allied anti-Hitler troops in Normandy. - Ed.). By the end of the day, about 100,000 soldiers and officers of the allied armies were concentrated on the Norman beaches and began the battle to expand the bridgehead. So the second front was opened in Western Europe. The agreement on its opening was reached at a conference of the leaders of the three allied powers in Tehran, which was held from November 28 to December 1, 1943.

Operation Overlord begins. June 1944

The concept - "second front" - in the diplomatic and military correspondence of the Soviet leadership and the Western allies meant the military operations of the armed forces of the United States and England in Western Europe, precisely in Western Europe, for only a crushing simultaneous onslaught on Germany from the east and west, from territories directly leading the armies of the states of the anti-Hitler coalition to the borders of Germany itself and to the capital of the Third Reich, allowed the Allies to take the citadel of the Nazi bloc in a powerful vice. Only such conditions ensured victory over the Nazi Reich in the entire Second World War.

On June 4, 1943, a message from F. Roosevelt was received in Moscow, in which he, on his own behalf and on behalf of W. Churchill, informed the Soviet government about the measures taken by the allies in the Far East and Africa, about their desire to withdraw Italy from the war in the near future ... Referring to the question of a new postponement of the opening of the second front to 1944, Roosevelt wrote: "According to the current plans in the British Isles in the spring of 1944, a sufficiently large number of people and materials should be concentrated in order to allow a comprehensive invasion of the continent at this time." ...

This fact alone contributed to the rapprochement between Roosevelt and Stalin, much to Churchill's displeasure. It was there, in Tehran, that friendly relations were established between Roosevelt and Stalin, which continued until Roosevelt's death on April 12, 1945.

But there were also considerations of a purely military-strategic nature. First, after the Battle of Kursk, the world war took on its own internal dynamics. Militarily, the USSR did not need a second front. It became clear to everyone, including Roosevelt, that the Soviet Union was able to single-handedly defeat Germany. The United States needed a second front in order to establish favorable post-war positions in control over Europe, over Germany, and through Europe and Germany over the rest of the world in order to gain trump cards in the post-war, as it was believed, bargaining with the Soviet Union.

Secondly, it turned out that it was like the school of Roosevelt that prevailed, who believed that cooperation with the USSR during the war should be continued in cooperation with the Soviet Union after the war. Without this cooperation, Roosevelt believed, the world would be doomed to an arms race. The arms race, according to Roosevelt, was incompatible with a healthy world economy. It was necessary to create, as he put it, the construction of four policemen. These are 4 powers - the United States, the USSR, Great Britain and China. They alone had to keep certain armed forces, all the rest had to be disarmed. Both the defeated and the aggressors. Like the winners, France, Poland, etc. But this had to be done in agreement with the Soviet Union.

At first, the US delegation at the Tehran Conference took an indefinite, wait-and-see position on the issue of creating a second front against Nazi Germany. However, on the whole, it was guided by the decisions of the Anglo-American conference in Quebec held in August 1943. The decisions of the Quebec Conference were in line with the strategic direction adopted by the United States government.

The essence of this strategic orientation was that it was no longer possible to delay the opening of a real second front. The danger of further delay, as well as the perniciousness of the British doctrine that “Germany can be defeated by a series of exhausting operations in northern Italy, the eastern Mediterranean, Greece, the Balkans, Romania and other countries - satellites, ”said, in particular, the US Secretary of War G. Stimson, who wrote to Roosevelt in August 1943:“ In light of the post-war problems that we face, such a position ... seems extremely dangerous. We, like Great Britain, have made a clear commitment to open a valid second front. We cannot expect that even one of our pin-prick operations can deceive Stalin into believing that we are true to our obligations. ”(Stimson Henry L., Bundy McGeorge. On Active Service in Peace and War. New York , 1947. P. 436-437).

President Roosevelt himself was aware of the danger of a further postponement of the second front. On the eve of the Tehran conference, he told his son that "if things in Russia continue as they do now, then it is possible that next spring there will be no need for a second front!" (Roosevelt Elliot. Through his eyes. - M., 1947. S. 161).

A British delegation led by Prime Minister Churchill arrived in Tehran with their own plans.

The course of the war, in which "the honor of almost all victories on land belongs to the Russians" (Churchill Winston S. The Second World War, vol. V. Boston, 1951. P.126) worried the British even more than the Americans. If England, they believed, “does not come out of this war on equal terms” with the USSR, its position in the international arena could change dramatically, and Russia would become “the diplomatic master of the world” (ibid.).

The British ruling circles considered the way out of this situation not only to intensify hostilities by the Anglo-American armed forces, but above all to revise the strategic plans adopted jointly with the Americans in Quebec in August 1943, with the aim of refusing or at least further postponing the second front in northwestern France and replacing it with operations in Italy, the Balkans and the Aegean Sea, with access to Southeast Europe and to the southwestern border of the Soviet Union.

Acceptance of these plans, most fully set out in the memorandum of the British Committee of Chiefs of Staff of November 11, 1943, "fully and completely" approved by the Prime Minister, the British side tried to achieve on the eve of the conference of the three powers in Tehran in order to appear before the Soviet Union in a united front with the Americans. ...

The American side, however, actually avoided discussing the issues of European strategy at the Cairo Conference (November 22-26, 1943), realizing that “the final decisions will depend on the results of the talks in Tehran with the Russians” (Matloff M. From Casablanca to “Overlord ". - M., 1964. S. 418). Churchill was irritated, but not discouraged by the position of the Americans, and, as noted by the American historian R. Sherwood, in Tehran he made a "last and, one might say, desperate attempt" to defend his plans (Robert Sherwood. Roosevelt and Hopkins. Through the eyes of an eyewitness. - M ., 1958.T. 2.S. 484). The discussion about the second front was opened by President Roosevelt at the first meeting of the Tehran conference on November 28, 1943. He announced that at the Anglo-American conference in Quebec in August 1943, a decision was made to invade France around May 1, 1944. the president immediately made a reservation that if the United States and England were to conduct large amphibious operations in the Mediterranean, the invasion of France might have to be postponed for two or three months. The Americans, he said, did not want to “postpone the date of the Canal invasion beyond the months of May or June. At the same time, the President noted, there are many places where the Anglo-American troops could be used. They could be used in Italy in the Adriatic Sea region, in the Aegean Sea region, finally, to help Turkey if she enters the war "(Churchill Winston S. The Second World War. Vol. V. Boston, 1951. P. 126) ...

Roosevelt was interested in the opinion of the Soviet delegation on the question of how the Allies could most significantly alleviate the situation of the Soviet Union, as well as how best to use the Anglo-American forces stationed in the Mediterranean Sea.

USSR, USA and Great Britain I. Stalin, F. Roosevelt, W. Churchill during the Tehran Conference of 1943

The Soviet delegation proposed to base all operations in 1944 on Operation Overlord, that is, the landing in northwestern France, and to support it by invading southern France - either simultaneously with the first operation, or a little earlier or later.

However, the British Prime Minister again tried to convince Stalin and Roosevelt of the preference for military operations in the Balkans, in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, by postponing Operation Overlord. He tried to replace the opening of a second front in France with the development of operations in Italy and in the Balkans, in order to ensure the occupation of Central and Southeastern Europe by Anglo-American troops, and transfer the question of the timing of the start of operations across the English Channel to the "military specialists".

The opening of an effective second front against Nazi Germany was once again under threat. In the current situation, the Soviet delegation showed decisiveness and firmness. ... The Nazis' transition to strategic defense was fraught with great danger in the absence of military operations in the West. Without a second front, Germany could freely regroup its forces and maneuver its reserves, which would significantly complicate the actions of Soviet troops at the front.

The head of the Soviet delegation therefore repeated that the leaders of the USSR, the USA and England should resolve three main questions: the date of the start of the Overlord, the commander-in-chief of this operation, and the need for an auxiliary operation in southern France.

At a meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States and Britain, held on the morning of November 30, 1943, after a lengthy discussion, it was decided that the United States and Britain would launch Operation Overlord during May 1944, concurrently with an auxiliary operation in southern France. The latter operation will be undertaken on a scale to which the available amphibious means will allow.

Planning Operation Overlord. From left to right: Supreme Commander of the Expeditionary Force in Europe D. Eisenhower, Air Marshal T. Lee-Mallory, Air Marshal A.U. Tedder, Field Marshal B.L. Montgomery

As a result, at the Tehran Conference, the question of opening a second front in Western Europe was finally resolved and it was agreed that Anglo-American troops would land in the amount of 35 divisions in northwestern France in May 1944, and that this operation would be supported by the landing of troops in Southern France. Stalin, in turn, announced that Soviet troops would launch an offensive at about the same time in order to prevent the transfer of German forces from the eastern to the western front. This most important decision of the Tehran conference was recorded in a secret agreement, which also contained an equally important point: "The conference ... agreed that the military headquarters of the three powers should henceforth keep in close contact with each other regarding the forthcoming operations in Europe."

The decision taken in Tehran to coordinate the actions of the allies against the common enemy was a success for the Soviet government. The decision to deliver a crushing joint blow to Hitlerite Germany fully met the interests of the anti-Hitler coalition as a whole.

In Tehran, the Soviet delegation has achieved a lot. The date for the opening of the second front in Western Europe was determined - May 1944, the question of the commander-in-chief of this front was resolved. Churchill's Mediterranean strategy, according to which the main forces of England and the United States were to attack Germany through Italy and the Balkans, collapsed: Roosevelt supported Stalin.

In the "Declaration of the Three Powers" adopted on December 1, 1943, the participants in the Tehran Conference declared full agreement on the scale and timing of operations to be undertaken from the east, west and south. Confidence was expressed that the agreement of the three powers would ensure lasting peace between peoples.

DECLARATION OF THE THREE POWERS

We, the President of the United States, the Prime Minister of Great Britain and the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, have met over the past four days in the capital of our ally, Iran, and have formulated and reaffirmed our common policy.

We express our determination that our countries will work together both during the war and in subsequent times of peace.

As for the war, representatives of our military headquarters participated in our roundtable talks and we agreed on our plans to destroy the German armed forces. We have come to full agreement on the scope and timing of the operations to be undertaken from the east, west and south.

The mutual understanding we have achieved here guarantees our victory.

With regard to peacetime, we are confident that the agreement that exists between us will ensure a lasting peace. We fully recognize the high responsibility that rests on us and on all the United Nations for the implementation of a peace that will receive the approval of the overwhelming majority of the peoples of the world and which will eliminate the scourges and horrors of war for many generations.

Together with our diplomatic advisers, we examined the problems of the future. We will strive for cooperation and active participation of all countries, large and small, whose peoples have devoted themselves in heart and mind, like our peoples, to the task of eliminating tyranny, slavery, oppression and intolerance. We will welcome them to join the global family of democracies whenever they wish.

No power in the world can prevent us from destroying German armies on land, their submarines at sea and destroying their military factories from the air.

Our offensive will be merciless and growing.

Having finished our friendly meetings, we are confidently awaiting the day when all the peoples of the world will live freely, free from tyranny, and in accordance with their different aspirations and their consciences.

We arrived here with hope and determination. We are leaving here as true friends in spirit and purpose.

ROOSEVELT
Stalin
CHURCHILL

The Tehran conference convincingly showed that, despite the fundamental difference in the political and social structure of the USSR, on the one hand, and the United States and England, on the other, these countries could successfully cooperate in the struggle against a common enemy, they sought and found a mutually acceptable solution to the disputes that arose between them. issues, although they often approached these issues from completely different positions, which were based, among other things, on the different geopolitical interests of the parties.

Postage stamp of the USSR No. 878 1943, dedicated to the Tehran conference

Victor Gavrilov, Leading Researcher
Research Institute (Military History)
Military Academy of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces