(what's this?)
Home
Discussion Forum
Blog
Galleries
Video Archive
Audio Archive
Document Archive
Charts
Timelines
POAC counter- spin
Buzzwords
Headline Archive
Daily Email Newsletter
Postal newsletter
Links
POAC Store
Recommended Books
Donate
Contact
POAC Myspace 
 
If you are presently serving in the military or in the Delayed Enlistment Program and beginning to rethink your participation, here are resources to help you.
 

 Contributing Columnists

Tj Templeton
Jack Dalton
Anwaar Hussain
Doris Colmes
Crisis Papers
Vincent L Guarisco
W. David Jenkins III
Dr. Steven Jonas
Lucinda Marshall
Jason Miller
Andrew Wahl
Rowan Wolf
Reader Submissions
 

POAC merchandise:

T-shirts, fleece, tank-tops, prints, magnets and more...

 

Must-see Selections

November 2006 vote fraud
 
14 points of fascism
 
Sept. 11: They Let it happen 
 
A brief history of the PNAC: a refresher 
 
Bush Cronyism
 
2004 election data
 
Catapulting the propaganda: The Rendon group
The office of special plans
The Whitehouse Iraq Group
 
 

F r o m   t h e Archives

Because there's a lot of misinformation out there: the ACLU's position on religion in school. 
 
BRITAIN ran a covert 'dirty tricks' operation designed specifically to produce misleading intelligence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction to give the UK a justifiable excuse to wage war on Iraq.
 
April 9, 1944: The Danger of American Fascism
 
What Is the Plan If There's Another 9/11? According to Philip Giraldi, writing in the new issue of the American Conservative, it's to nuke Iran
 
Families who fought for 9/11 commission declare it a failure
 
It's fascist picture story time!
Constitution of the United States of America
Declaration of Independence
Bill of rights
Star Spangled Banner
I have a Dream by Martin Luther King, Jr.
You can't bitch if you don't vote.... Register NOW! 

 


EXCLUSIVE: THE SECRET "PERCENTAGES AGREEMENT"

Bernard Weiner,  The Crisis Papers

Turns out that my Ph.D. dissertation -- that tome yellowing in a closet
upstairs -- contains information that corrects Bush's ignorant distortions about
World War II history. Bush, in Europe recently for ceremonies marking the end of
that war, revived the old conservative canard that the U.S. and Britain "gave
away" Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. Bush compared the Yalta Agreement
to Chamberlain's Munich capitulation and to the Hitler-Stalin pact. He couldn't
have been more wrong.

And, even though there were numerous corrective articles since Bush's May 7
speech in Riga -- see here, here, and here -- none of them mentioned the key
element of the wartime meetings between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin: the
so-called "percentages agreement."

Few know about this episode -- in fact, few in government at the time were
brought into the loop about it, it was such a closely guarded secret -- and I'm
happy to share it here, based on the research done for my dissertation, the
essence of which involved the origins of the Cold War.

As war in Europe was heading toward a victory for the Americans, Brits and
Russians, the Big Three had to figure out the post-war geopolitical landscape.
At a meeting between Churchill and Stalin in Moscow in 1944 (which may or may
not have included Roosevelt's representative Averill Harriman), Churchill, on a
half-sheet of paper, improvised some numbers that would indicate which ally
should have what share of responsibility in the various countries -- "take the
lead" was the euphemism -- both in the immediate situation and, by
implication, after the war was over.

Churchill, the ultimate realist, realized that the Soviet Union had many
millions of troops on the ground in Eastern Europe, and in no way was he going to
convince President Roosevelt that America should take on that Red Army while
the Allies were still trying to defeat Germany and Japan.

HERE ARE THE NUMBERS

Churchill, interested in protecting what he could of the collapsing British
Empire, kept Greece in England's "sphere of influence" and, acknowledging that
Stalin already had Eastern Europe in his grasp, OKd the Soviet Union "taking
the lead" in that region. Churchill wrote Roosevelt that they might as well
acknowledge the realities on the ground in Eastern Europe since "neither you nor
we have any troops there at all, and [the Soviets] probably will do what they
like anyhow."

The percentages agreed to by Stalin and Churchill, and acquiesced to by
Roosevelt, included the Soviet Union "taking the lead" in Eastern Europe at 50% in
Yugoslavia, 90% in Rumania and so on in Hungary, Bulgaria, et al.; Great
Britain would "take the lead" in Greece at 90%. During the rest of the war, the
three allies scrupulously abided by the "percentages agreement." Stalin believed
he had been given carte blanche in Eastern Europe, and likewise that Churchill
could do what he wanted in Greece.

Realizing that carving up Europe into zones of influence might not look good
if the word got out, Churchill suggested to Stalin that maybe it would be a
good idea to burn the half-sheet of paper with the percentages on it. (Stalin
said it was OK for Churchill to keep it.)

At Yalta in 1945, worried about what Stalin might do in post-war Eastern
Europe, the Americans and English tried to ameliorate the situation by having
everyone sign a "Declaration on Liberated Europe," promising democracy and all
other good things. But Stalin saw the document as little more than a
piece-of-paper formality; he didn't let that stop him from setting up the protective
satellite-state governments in Eastern Europe, which eventually became the Warsaw
Pact alliance.

And, the U.S. and Great Britain, not anxious immediately to fight another
major war, this one against their Soviet ally, and anxious to rebuild their own
war-torn societies, did little but bluster against Stalin's post-war tactics in
Eastern Europe. (In truth, Stalin saw the Eastern European satellites as a
strategic buffer between the Soviet Union and the West; he gave no indication
that he was interested in moving militarily into Western Europe.)

JOSH MARSHALL GETS TO THE NUB

Josh Marshall sums up the controversy:

"In making this argument [Bush joined] a rich tradition of maniacs who
believe that at the end of World War II we should have joined with the defeated
remainder of the German army and fought our way through Eastern Europe to the
border of Russia and, in all likelihood, on to Moscow to overthrow the Soviet
Union itself -- certainly not a difficult proposition considering what an
insubstantial land Army the Soviet Union had at the time.

"If that seems like an over-dramatic alternative scenario, then you just
aren't familiar with the history of the period.

"Roosevelt didn't hand the Baltics, Poland and the rest of what became the
Warsaw Pact countries over to Soviet rule. The Red Army was there in force
already. The question was whether we were able and willing to remove them by force.

"The president also makes common cause, though whether he's familiar with the
history he's wading into I don't know, with those who argued before the war
and after that the US and the UK made their fundamental error in the war
itself, by allying with the Soviets against Nazism rather than with Nazism against
the Soviets."
Bush, for whatever partisan motive, chose to revive this historical period in
his Riga speech -- as seen through a dated, Cold War, anti-Communist prism --
but he got a good deal of his facts wrong.

And now you know the Rest of the Story. #

--------

Bernard Weiner, Ph..D. in government & international relations, blogs on The
Crisis Papers ( www.crisispapers.org/features /bw-blogs.htm ), which he
co-edits.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information please review Title 17, Sec. 107 of the U.S. Code. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

privacy policy

2006  OLDAmericanCentury.org and OLDAmericanCentury.com