yalta conference presentation

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Yalta Conference

By: History.com Editors

Updated: November 1, 2022 | Original: October 29, 2009

The Yalta Conference was a meeting of three World War II allies: U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt , British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin . The trio met in February 1945 in the resort city of Yalta, located along the Black Sea coast of the Crimean Peninsula. The “Big Three” Allied leaders discussed the post-war fate of defeated Germany and the rest of Europe, the terms of Soviet entry into the ongoing war in the Pacific against Japan and the formation and operation of the new United Nations.

WATCH: World War II Documentaries on HISTORY Vault 

Tehran Conference

Prior to the Yalta Conference, the three leaders met in November 1943 in Tehran, Iran, where they coordinated the next phase of war against the Axis Powers in Europe and the Pacific.

At the Tehran Conference , the United States and Britain had committed to launching an invasion of northern France in mid-1944, opening another front of the war against Nazi Germany . Stalin, meanwhile, had agreed in principle to join the war against Japan in the Pacific after Germany was defeated.

By February 1945, as Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin gathered again at Yalta, an Allied victory in Europe was on the horizon. Having liberated France and Belgium from Nazi occupation, the Allies now threatened the German border; to the east, Soviet Union troops had driven back the Germans in Poland, Bulgaria and Romania and gotten within 40 miles of Berlin.

This put Stalin at a distinct advantage during the meeting at the Black Sea resort, a location he himself had proposed after insisting his doctors had barred him from traveling long distances.

Pacific War

While the war in Europe was winding down, Roosevelt knew the United States still faced a protracted struggle against Japan in the Pacific War, and wanted to confirm Soviet support in an effort to limit the length of and casualties sustained in that conflict. At Yalta, Stalin agreed that Soviet forces would join the Allies in the war against Japan within "two or three months" after Germany’s surrender.

In return for its support in the Pacific War, the other Allies agreed, the Soviet Union would gain control of Japanese territory it had lost in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05, including southern Sakhalin (Karafuto) and the Kuril Islands.

Stalin also demanded that the United States grant diplomatic recognition of Mongolia’s independence from China: the Mongolian People’s Republic, founded in 1924, was a Soviet satellite.

WATCH VIDEO: FDR: The War Years

Division of Germany

At Yalta, the Big Three agreed that after Germany’s unconditional surrender, it would be divided into four post-war occupation zones, controlled by U.S., British, French and Soviet military forces. The city of Berlin would also be divided into similar occupation zones.

France’s leader, Charles de Gaulle , was not invited to the Yalta Conference, and Stalin agreed to include France in the post-war governing of Germany only if France’s zone of occupation was taken from the US and British zones.

The Allied leaders also determined that Germany should be completely demilitarized and “denazified,” and that it would assume some responsibility for post-war reparations, but not sole responsibility.

Poland and Eastern Europe

Stalin took a hard line on the question of Poland, pointing out that within three decades, Germany had twice used the nation as a corridor through which to invade Russia. He declared that the Soviet Union would not return the territory in Poland that it had annexed in 1939, and would not meet the demands of the Polish government-in-exile based in London.

Stalin did agree to allow representatives from other Polish political parties into the communist-dominated provisional government installed in Poland, and to sanction free elections there—one of Churchill’s key objectives.

In addition, the Soviets promised to allow free elections in all territories in Eastern Europe liberated from Nazi occupation, including Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.

In return, the United States and Britain agreed that future governments in Eastern European nations bordering Soviet Union should be “friendly” to the Soviet regime, satisfying Stalin’s desire for a zone of influence to provide a buffer against future conflicts in Europe.

United Nations

At Yalta, Stalin agreed to Soviet participation in the United Nations , the international peacekeeping organization that Roosevelt and Churchill had agreed to form in 1941 as part of the Atlantic Charter . He gave this commitment after all three leaders had agreed on a plan whereby all permanent members of the organization’s Security Council would hold veto power.

Having discussed these key issues, the Big Three agreed to meet again after Germany’s surrender, in order to finalize the borders of post-war Europe and other outstanding questions.

“There is no doubt that the tide of Anglo-Soviet-American friendship had reached a new high,” wrote James Byrnes, who accompanied Roosevelt to Yalta, in his memoirs. Though Roosevelt and Churchill also considered the Yalta Conference an indication that their wartime cooperation with the Soviets would continue in peacetime, such optimism would prove to be short-lived.

Impact of the Yalta Conference

By March 1945, it had become clear that Stalin had no intention of keeping his promises regarding political freedom in Poland. Instead, Soviet troops helped squash any opposition to the provisional government based in Lublin, Poland. When elections were finally held in 1947, they predictably solidified Poland as one of the first Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe.

Many Americans criticized Roosevelt—who was seriously ill during the Yalta Conference and died just two months later—for the concessions he made at Yalta regarding Soviet influence in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia.

President Harry Truman , Roosevelt’s successor, would be far more suspicious of Stalin that July, when the leaders of the Allied powers met again at the Potsdam Conference in Germany to hash out the final terms for ending World War II in Europe.

But with his troops occupying much of Germany and Eastern Europe, Stalin was able to effectively ratify the concessions he won at Yalta, pressing his advantage over Truman and Churchill (who was replaced mid-conference by Prime Minister Clement Attlee ).

In March 1946, barely a year after the Yalta Conference, Churchill delivered his famous speech declaring that an “ iron curtain ” had fallen across Eastern Europe, signaling a definitive end to cooperation between the Soviet Union and its Western allies, and the beginning of the Cold War .

READ MORE:  How the 'Big Three' Teed Up the Cold War at the 1945 Yalta Conference

The Yalta Conference 1945. Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State . Terry Charman, “How Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin Planned to End the Second World War.” Imperial War Museums , January 12, 2018. The End of World War II and the Division of Europe. Center for European Studies, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Course: US history   >   Unit 8

• Origins of the Cold War
• The GI Bill
• African Americans, women, and the GI Bill
• The baby boom
• The growth of suburbia
• The dark side of suburbia

Start of the Cold War - The Yalta Conference and containment

• Start of the Cold War - The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan
• Start of the Cold War - The Berlin airlift and the creation of NATO
• The postwar era, 1945-1950
• The Cold War was a struggle for world dominance between the capitalist United States and the communist Soviet Union.
• At the Yalta Conference, the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and France agreed to split Germany into four zones of occupation after the war.
• The US ambassador in Moscow warned that the Soviet Union desired to expand throughout the world and prescribed the "containment" of communism as the chief US foreign policy strategy.

What was the Cold War?

• The "first world" consisted of the United States and its developed, capitalist allies, such as the United Kingdom and France
• The "second world" referred to communist nations, including China, Russia, and the satellite countries Russia controlled, such as Poland and Ukraine
• The "third world" referred to everywhere else, usually developing countries in Asia and Latin America over which the United States and Soviet Union vied for influence

The Yalta Conference and the end of World War II

The "long telegram" and containment, what do you think.

• See David M. Kennedy, Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 425, 801.
• Bureau of International Information Programs, Outline of US History , (US Department of State, 2011), 260.
• See David M. Kennedy and Lizabeth Cohen, The American Pageant: A History of the American People, 15th (AP) edition (Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning, 2013), 846.
• James T. Patterson, Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 114.
• Outline of US History , 261.

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

World History Edu

• WHE Answers

What happened at the Yalta Conference in 1945 and how did it lead to the Cold War?

by World History Edu · March 8, 2024

The Yalta Conference, held from February 4 to February 11, 1945, was a pivotal meeting of the “Big Three” Allied leaders during World War II: President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States, Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, and Premier Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union.

The conference took place in the Livadia Palace near Yalta in Crimea. Its primary purpose was to discuss the reorganization of post-war Europe and establish a framework for the post-war world order, laying the groundwork for the United Nations and addressing issues related to the imminent defeat of Nazi Germany and the continuation of the war against Japan.

Brief History of World War II

Key Outcomes of the Yalta Conference

Allied leaders at Yalta discussed post-war Germany, Eastern Europe, and the UN’s future. They agreed France would help govern postwar Germany, which would partly pay for reparations.

They aimed for Eastern European governments to be Soviet-friendly but committed to free elections in liberated areas. A declaration on Poland allowed Communists in its government. For the UN, they agreed on a U.S. voting procedure plan, giving veto power to five permanent Security Council members, including France.

Below are some of the major agreements struck at the Yalta Conference:

• Division of Germany:  The leaders agreed that Germany would be divided into four occupation zones, to be administered by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and France. Berlin, the German capital, would also be divided into four sectors.
• Free Elections in Eastern Europe:  Stalin agreed to allow free elections in Eastern European countries liberated from Nazi occupation. However, the Soviet Union’s interpretation of “free elections” led to the establishment of pro-Soviet governments in the region, contributing to the start of the Cold War.
• Soviet Entry into the War against Japan:  Stalin agreed that the Soviet Union would declare war on Japan within three months of Germany’s surrender, in return for territorial concessions, including the southern part of Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and a sphere of influence in Manchuria.
• Founding of the United Nations:  The conference laid the groundwork for the United Nations, agreeing on the structure of the UN Security Council, which would include five permanent members (the United States, the Soviet Union, China, the United Kingdom, and France) with veto power.
• Reparations and Post-War Reconstruction:  The leaders discussed but did not fully resolve the issue of reparations from Germany. The Soviet Union sought substantial reparations from Germany to help rebuild the Soviet economy, which had been devastated by the war.

The Yalta Conference was a crucial event in shaping the post-World War II order, with significant implications for the political landscape of Europe and Asia, the onset of the Cold War, and the establishment of the United Nations. Image: Soviet, American, and British diplomats during the Yalta Conference.

What was the public reaction to the Yalta agreements

The initial response to the Yalta agreements was one of celebration, with President Roosevelt and others in the United States optimistic that the wartime alliance with the Soviet Union would transition smoothly into the postwar era.

This optimism was fleeting, as Roosevelt’s passing in April 1945 led to Harry S. Truman taking office. Almost immediately, Truman’s administration encountered friction with the Soviets regarding their role in Eastern Europe and disagreements over the United Nations.

The growing U.S.-Soviet tension alarmed many Americans, who then criticized Roosevelt’s approach at Yalta, accusing him of conceding too much to the Soviet Union, particularly in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia.

Controversies and Consequences

The agreement on free elections was seen by many as giving the Soviet Union free rein to establish Communist governments in Eastern Europe, leading to the division of Europe into Soviet and Western spheres of influence and laying the groundwork for the Cold War.

The Yalta agreements, once revealed in 1946, faced severe criticism in the United States due to Stalin’s failure to uphold his pledge for free elections in Eastern European countries like Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary.

Instead, these nations saw the establishment of communist regimes and suppression of non-communist parties, betraying the democratic ideals Roosevelt and Churchill believed Stalin would honor. This breach of trust, coupled with the incorrect assumption that Soviet support was crucial for victory in the Pacific, led to a situation where the Western Allies had limited leverage.

As Eastern Europe was under Soviet military control at war’s end, enforcing Stalin’s promises proved impossible, highlighting a critical misjudgment of Soviet intentions and the geopolitical reality post-Yalta.

Finally, the territorial concessions made to the Soviet Union for its participation in the Pacific War altered the geopolitical landscape in East Asia, contributing to future conflicts in the region.

Cold War Timeline: When Did the Cold War Start and End?

Frequently Asked Questions

Some critics of the Yalta Agreements argued that Roosevelt effectively “handed over” these regions despite the Soviet Union’s significant concessions during the negotiations. This shift marked the beginning of strained relations that would evolve into the Cold War, challenging the initial hopes for a lasting peace and cooperation established at Yalta.

The following are 9 frequently asked questions about the Yalta Conference and its consequences:

When and where was the Yalta Conference held?

The Yalta Conference, held from 4-11 February 1945, was a meeting of the “Big Three” Allied leaders—U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin—in Yalta, Crimea, to discuss the reorganization of post-World War II Europe and the establishment of the United Nations.

What were the main agreements made at the Yalta Conference?

Key agreements included the division of Germany into occupation zones, free elections in liberated European countries, the Soviet Union’s entry into the war against Japan after Germany’s surrender, and the founding of the United Nations to maintain peace and security.

Irma Grese: The youngest Nazi war criminal to be executed

Why is the Yalta Conference considered controversial?

The conference is controversial because critics argue it allowed for the expansion of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe, leading to the establishment of Communist governments in the region. They contend it effectively conceded Eastern Europe to Soviet control, laying the groundwork for the Cold War.

Did the Yalta Conference lead directly to the Cold War?

While the Yalta Conference itself did not cause the Cold War, the agreements and the differing interpretations of those agreements exacerbated tensions between the Soviet Union and the Western Allies, contributing to the mistrust and rivalry that characterized the Cold War.

At the Yalta Conference, Allied leaders, foreseeing a European victory but uncertain about the Pacific, negotiated Soviet entry into the war against Japan. Image: World Leaders at the negotiating table during the Yalta Conference.

How did the Yalta Conference affect the United Nations?

The Yalta Conference laid the groundwork for the establishment of the United Nations, with the leaders agreeing on a framework for a world organization aimed at preventing future global conflicts. This agreement was pivotal in the founding of the UN in October 1945.

The Yalta Conference has been subject to significant scrutiny and criticism, particularly regarding its outcomes for Eastern Europe. Image: A photo of several world leaders, including Stalin, Winston Churchill, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, at the conference.

Were there any disagreements at the Yalta Conference?

Yes, there were disagreements and contentious issues at the Yalta Conference, despite the overarching narrative of cooperation among the Allied leaders—Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States, Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, and Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union.

While the leaders worked towards common goals, their differing national interests and visions for the post-war world led to several areas of discord:

• Eastern Europe’s Future:  There was tension over the fate of Eastern European countries, particularly Poland. The Soviet Union wanted to establish governments friendly to Moscow in the liberated countries of Eastern Europe, effectively expanding its sphere of influence. The Western Allies, especially Churchill, were concerned about the imposition of Soviet control and the suppression of democratic freedoms in these nations. Although compromises were made, such as agreeing to free elections in Poland, the Soviet interpretation of these agreements led to the establishment of communist regimes, contrary to the Western Allies’ hopes for genuine democracy.
• Germany’s Post-War Treatment:  The Allies debated how to handle Germany after the war. There were differences in opinion on the severity of reparations, the level of industrial dismantlement, and the overall strategy to prevent Germany from becoming a military threat again. The British and Americans were wary of repeating the harsh Treaty of Versailles terms, fearing it could lead to future conflict, while the Soviet Union sought substantial reparations and security measures.
• United Nations and Security Council:  There were negotiations over the structure and powers of the proposed United Nations, particularly the veto power in the Security Council. The Soviet Union wanted all 16 of its republics to have UN membership, but settled for three (with only two eventually joining). The veto power for permanent members of the Security Council was a critical point of negotiation, ensuring that any of the five permanent members (later to include France and China alongside the USSR, the US, and the UK) could veto decisions, which was crucial for the Soviet Union.
• Soviet Participation in the Pacific War:  The conditions under which the Soviet Union would enter the war against Japan were carefully negotiated. The Soviets agreed to join the Pacific War within three months after Germany’s defeat in exchange for territorial concessions in Asia. However, the specifics of these concessions, including control over territories such as Sakhalin Island and the Kuril Islands, and influence in Manchuria, were points of negotiation and some contention.

How was France impacted by the two World Wars?

What was the significance of the Soviet Union’s agreement to enter the war against Japan?

The Soviet Union’s commitment to enter the war against Japan was significant because it promised a powerful new ally against Japan and influenced the strategic planning for the end of the war in the Pacific. It also secured Soviet interests in Asia, as agreed upon in return for Soviet military support against Japan.

Emperor Hirohito: Family, Reign, World War II, & Death

How did the outcomes of the Yalta Conference shape post-war Europe?

The outcomes of the Yalta Conference significantly shaped post-war Europe by determining the administrative division of Germany, influencing the political landscape of Eastern Europe, and setting the stage for the geopolitical tensions between the Soviet bloc and the Western Allies, which led to the Cold War.

What happened to the agreements made at the Yalta Conference after the war ended?

Some agreements made at the Yalta Conference were implemented, such as the division of Germany and the establishment of the United Nations. However, the promise of free elections in Eastern Europe was not fully realized, as the Soviet Union established or supported Communist governments in the region, leading to disputes with the West.

Nazi-Soviet Pact: Alliance Shaping Early World War II Dynamics

Tags: Allied leaders Cold War Eastern Europe Germany division post-war Europe Soviet Union United Kingdom United Nations United States World War II Yalta Conference

You may also like...

Why did the Soviet Union invade Afghanistan?

June 25, 2023

What is Magellan’s Passage? – History & Major Facts

March 23, 2024

What was the Statue of Zeus at Olympia?

July 13, 2023

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Next story  Why Agriculture is generally considered the most important development in early human history
• Previous story  Why did the Soviet Union Declare War on Japan in 1945?
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts

Most Powerful and Influential Women Leaders of the 20th Century

History of Abigail Adams: What did she write about in her letters to John Adams?

History of the UN Security Council: How were the Five Permanent Members selected?

Who was Alan Turing and Why did the UK government render an official apology to him?

History of the Holy See and how it finances its operations

Greatest African Leaders of all Time

Queen Elizabeth II: 10 Major Achievements

Donald Trump’s Educational Background

Donald Trump: 10 Most Significant Achievements

8 Most Important Achievements of John F. Kennedy

Odin in Norse Mythology: Origin Story, Meaning and Symbols

Ragnar Lothbrok – History, Facts & Legendary Achievements

9 Great Achievements of Queen Victoria

12 Most Influential Presidents of the United States

Most Ruthless African Dictators of All Time

Kwame Nkrumah: History, Major Facts & 10 Memorable Achievements

Greek God Hermes: Myths, Powers and Early Portrayals

8 Major Achievements of Rosa Parks

Kamala Harris: 10 Major Achievements

10 Most Famous Pharaohs of Egypt

How did Captain James Cook die?

The Exact Relationship between Elizabeth II and Elizabeth I

Nile River: Location, Importance & Major Facts

Sobek in Egyptian Mythology: Origin Story, Family, Powers, & Symbols

How and when was Morse Code Invented?

• Adolf Hitler Alexander the Great American Civil War Ancient Egyptian gods Ancient Egyptian religion Apollo Athena Athens Black history Carthage China Civil Rights Movement Cold War Constantine the Great Constantinople Egypt England France Germany Hera Horus India Isis John Adams Julius Caesar Loki Medieval History Military Generals Military History Nobel Peace Prize Odin Osiris Pan-Africanism Queen Elizabeth I Ra Religion Set (Seth) Soviet Union Thor Timeline Turkey Women’s History World War I World War II Zeus

• Teacher Opportunities
• AP U.S. Government Key Terms
• Bureaucracy & Regulation
• Campaigns & Elections
• Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
• Comparative Government
• Constitutional Foundation
• Criminal Law & Justice
• Economics & Financial Literacy
• English & Literature
• Environmental Policy & Land Use
• Executive Branch
• Federalism and State Issues
• Foreign Policy
• Gun Rights & Firearm Legislation
• Immigration
• Interest Groups & Lobbying
• Judicial Branch
• Legislative Branch
• Political Parties
• Science & Technology
• Social Services
• State History
• Supreme Court Cases
• U.S. History
• World History

Log-in to bookmark & organize content - it's free!

• Bell Ringers
• Lesson Plans
• Featured Resources

On This Day: The Yalta Conference

From February 4-11, 1945, leaders of the "Big Three," World War II allies Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Franklin Roosevelt, met at a Crimean resort at Yalta in Ukraine. Among the issues that were discussed was the fate of Germany after its defeat in the war. View these videos to see archival footage from a documentary that was produced by the U.S. War Department and learn more about this day in history.

The Yalta Conference

The U.S. War Department produced this documentary on the final meeting of the “Big Three” - Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Franklin Roosevelt, which took place at a Crimean resort in Ukraine.

Related Article

• On This Day in History Handout - Google Docs

Home Lessons IBDP History IB History Paper 3 Topics History of Europe Diplomacy in Europe (1919-1945) The Yalta Conference

The Yalta Conference

The Yalta Conference was a significant event in World War II history and profoundly impacted the post-war world order. This lesson plan includes a PowerPoint presentation that covers the background, objectives, and outcomes of the conference.

The PowerPoint includes various student activities that make the lesson engaging and interactive. These activities include a source analysis of a photograph of the Big Three (Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin), a political cartoon analysis, a map analysis, and a short film.

The source analysis of the photograph is an excellent way to encourage critical thinking skills in your students. They can analyse the leaders’ body language, facial expressions, and clothing to understand their attitudes and intentions during the Yalta conference. This activity helps students develop historical perspective and interpretive skills.

Similarly, the political cartoon analysis encourages students to analyse the cartoon’s symbolism, humour, and bias to understand the public perception of the conference. This activity helps students develop analytical skills and encourages them to think critically about propaganda.

The map source is also an effective way to help students visualise the political and geographic impact of the Yalta conference.

Finally, the short film in the lesson plan PowerPoint provides a visual and auditory component to the lesson, which can reinforce the key concepts and historical background.

Overall, this lesson plan for the Yalta Conference is a comprehensive and engaging way to help your students understand the conference’s historical significance. The various student activities, such as source analysis, political cartoon analysis, map analysis, and short film, encourage critical thinking, analytical skills, and historical perspective. Using this lesson plan can help your students develop a deeper understanding of this pivotal moment in world history.

Other Lessons you may like:

You need to have an account in order to download

Resource Information

Other related lessons.

My Life in Ancient Greece Worksheet

Immerse your students in the vibrant world of ancient Greece with the captivating lesson plan “My Life in Ancient Greece.” […]

Establishment of the Tokugawa Shogunate

Dive into the riveting world of 1603 Japan with the “Establishment of the Tokugawa Shogunate” lesson plan, where students embark […]

Reading Ancient Remains Worksheet

Dive into the ancient world with the “Reading Ancient Remains Worksheet,” a lesson plan designed to bridge the gap between […]

Chinese Civil War Causes and Effects Activity

“IB History: Chinese Civil War Causes and Effects Activity” delves into the dynamic and pivotal conflict that reshaped the 20th […]

What are you teaching?

Don't babylon with last-minute lesson plans, explore our catalogue today., request a lesson, thank you for contacting the cunning history teacher. we will contact you shortly, thank you for your lesson request, login to your account.

Email address

Create an account and download your first 3 lessons free

Forgot pass, enter email or username:, signup for your account.

The answers to this question and all your GCSE/iGCSE history topics is only a click away.

Download our FREE app for Android and iOS .

Yalta Conference, Feb 1945

• ❖ President Roosevelt of the USA.
• ❖ General Secretary Stalin of the USSR .
• ❖ Prime Minister Churchill of Great Britain.
• ❖ The superpowers agreed on the Declaration of Liberated Europe which guaranteed all countries freed from Nazi control the right to hold democratic and free elections.
• ❖ Nazi Germany and Berlin would be divided into four zones, to be controlled by the USA, Britain, France and the Soviet Union .
• ❖ Germany would be reduced in size.
• ❖ Germany would be demilitarised.
• ❖ Germany would be ordered to pay reparations.
• ❖ After the war was over, Nazi war criminals would be tried and the Nazi Party banned.
• ❖ Poland would fall under the Soviet sphere of influence.
• ❖ Poland would be run under a democratically elected government.
• ❖ Eastern Europe would have free elections.
• ❖ The USSR would declare war on Japan 3 months after Nazi Germany was defeated.
• ❖ The United Nations was created.
• ❖ The USSR wanted Germany to pay high reparations ; Britain and the USA disagreed.
• ❖ Britain and the USA wanted Germany to recover, whereas the USSR wanted to keep Germany weak.
• ❖ Stalin wanted the Polish-German border to be much further to the west and desired a 'friendly ' Polish government. Britain and the USA were worried this would mean Poland would be controlled by the USSR .

Welcome to Clever Lili!

Turbocharge your history revision with our revolutionary new app! Clever Lili is here to help you ace your exams.

Enhanced Learning

Study guides, android and ios app, alexa and google home, ask question in facebook messenger, gcse history.

A text and voice app that allows you to easily revise for your GCSE/IGCSE exams wherever you are. Whether you’re at home or on the bus, GCSE History provides you with thousands of convenient bite-sized facts to help you pass your exams with flying colours. Great for student and teachers.

Milestones: 1937–1945

The yalta conference, 1945.

The Yalta Conference took place in a Russian resort town in the Crimea from February 4–11, 1945, during World War Two. At Yalta, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt , British Prime Minister Winston Churchill , and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin made important decisions regarding the future progress of the war and the postwar world.

The Allied leaders came to Yalta knowing that an Allied victory in Europe was practically inevitable but less convinced that the Pacific war was nearing an end. Recognizing that a victory over Japan might require a protracted fight, the United States and Great Britain saw a major strategic advantage to Soviet participation in the Pacific theater. At Yalta, Roosevelt and Churchill discussed with Stalin the conditions under which the Soviet Union would enter the war against Japan and all three agreed that, in exchange for potentially crucial Soviet participation in the Pacific theater, the Soviets would be granted a sphere of influence in Manchuria following Japan’s surrender. This included the southern portion of Sakhalin, a lease at Port Arthur (now Lüshunkou), a share in the operation of the Manchurian railroads, and the Kurile Islands. This agreement was the major concrete accomplishment of the Yalta Conference.

The Allied leaders also discussed the future of Germany, Eastern Europe and the United Nations. Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin agreed not only to include France in the postwar governing of Germany, but also that Germany should assume some, but not all, responsibility for reparations following the war. The Americans and the British generally agreed that future governments of the Eastern European nations bordering the Soviet Union should be “friendly” to the Soviet regime while the Soviets pledged to allow free elections in all territories liberated from Nazi Germany. Negotiators also released a declaration on Poland, providing for the inclusion of Communists in the postwar national government. In discussions regarding the future of the United Nations, all parties agreed to an American plan concerning voting procedures in the Security Council, which had been expanded to five permanent members following the inclusion of France. Each of these permanent members was to hold a veto on decisions before the Security Council.

Initial reaction to the Yalta agreements was celebratory. Roosevelt and many other Americans viewed it as proof that the spirit of U.S.-Soviet wartime cooperation would carry over into the postwar period. This sentiment, however, was short lived. With the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, Harry S. Truman became the thirty-third president of the United States. By the end of April, the new administration clashed with the Soviets over their influence in Eastern Europe, and over the United Nations. Alarmed at the perceived lack of cooperation on the part of the Soviets, many Americans began to criticize Roosevelt’s handling of the Yalta negotiations. To this day, many of Roosevelt’s most vehement detractors accuse him of “handing over” Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia to the Soviet Union at Yalta despite the fact that the Soviets did make many substantial concessions.

Yalta Conference

Recommended

More related content, what's hot, what's hot ( 20 ), viewers also liked, viewers also liked ( 20 ), similar to yalta conference, similar to yalta conference ( 20 ).

• 1. By: George Harchack Brandt Baer

Help inform the discussion

Presidential Speeches

March 1, 1945: address to congress on yalta, about this speech.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

March 01, 1945

President Roosevelt reports on his meeting with Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin at the Yalta Conference during the l ate stages of World War II.  The leaders agreed on the goals of a quick defeat of Germany and efforts to obtain lasting peace throughout the world, namely through a future United Nations conference.  Roosevelt also demands an unconditional surrender by Germany, to be followed by a temporary joint occupation of the country.  In addition, the President states the allies’ “joint responsibility” of lands liberated from Nazi control, and their intentions to make these lands “self-supportive and productive.” 

• Download Audio

I hope that you will pardon me for this unusual posture of sitting down during the presentation of what I want to say, but I know that you will realize that it makes it a lot easier for me not to have to carry about ten pounds of steel around on the bottom of my legs; and also because of the fact that I have just completed a fourteen-thousand-mile trip. First of all, I want to say, it is good to be home. It has been a long journey. I hope you will also agree that it has been, so far, a fruitful one. Speaking in all frankness, the question of whether it is entirely fruitful or not lies to a great extent in your hands. For unless you here in the halls of the American Congress- with the support of the American people—concur in the general conclusions reached at Yalta, and give them your active support, the meeting will not have produced lasting results. That is why I have come before you at the earliest hour I could after my return. I want to make a personal report to you—and, at the same time, to the people of the country. Many months of earnest work are ahead of us all, and I should like to feel that when the last stone is laid on the structure of international peace, it will be an achievement for which all of us in America have worked steadfastly and unselfishly—together. I am returning from this trip—that took me so far—refreshed and inspired. I was well the entire time. I was not ill for a second, until I arrived back in Washington, and there I heard all of the rumors which had occurred in my absence. I returned from the trip refreshed and inspired. The Roosevelts are not, as you may suspect, averse to travel. We seem to thrive on it! Far away as I was, I was kept constantly informed of affairs in the United States. The modern miracles of rapid communication have made this world very small. We must always bear in mind that fact, when we speak or think of international relations. I received a steady stream of messages from Washington—I might say from not only the executive branch with all its departments, but also from the legislative branch—and except where radio silence was necessary for security purposes, I could continuously send messages any place in the world. And of course, in a grave emergency, we could have even risked the breaking of the security rule. I come from the Crimea Conference with a firm belief that we have made a good start on the road to a world of peace. There were two main purposes in this Crimea Conference. The first was to bring defeat to Germany with the greatest possible speed, and the smallest possible loss of Allied men. That purpose is now being carried out in great force. The German Army, and the German people, are feeling the ever-increasing might of our fighting men and of the Allied armies. Every hour gives us added pride in the heroic advance of our troops in Germany—on German soil—toward a meeting with the gallant Red Army. The second purpose was to continue to build the foundation for an international accord that would bring order and security after the chaos of the war, that would give some assurance of lasting peace among the Nations of the world. Toward that goal also, a tremendous stride was made. At Teheran, a little over a year ago, there were long-range military plans laid by the Chiefs of Staff of the three most powerful Nations. Among the civilian leaders at Teheran, however, at that time, there were only exchanges of views and expressions of opinion. No political arrangements were made—and none was attempted. At the Crimea Conference, however, the time had come for getting down to specific cases in the political field. There was on all sides at this Conference an enthusiastic effort to reach an agreement. Since the time of Teheran, a year ago, there had developed among all of us a—what shall I call it?—a greater facility in negotiating with each other, that augurs well for the peace of the world. We know each other better. I have never for an instant wavered in my belief that an agreement to insure world peace and security can be reached. There were a number of things that we did that were concrete—that were definite. For instance, the lapse of time between Teheran and Yalta without conferences of civilian representatives of the three major powers has proved to be too long-fourteen months. During that long period, local problems were permitted to become acute in places like Poland and Greece and Italy and Yugoslavia. Therefore, we decided at Yalta that, even if circumstances made it impossible for the heads of the three Governments to meet more often in the future, we would make sure that there would be more frequent personal contacts for the exchange of views, between the Secretaries of State and the Foreign Ministers of these three powers. We arranged for periodic meetings at intervals of three or four months. I feel very confident that under this arrangement there will be no recurrences of the incidents which this winter disturbed the friends of world-wide cooperation and collaboration. When we met at Yalta, in addition to laying our strategic and tactical plans for the complete and final military victory over Germany, there were other problems of vital political consequence. For instance, first, there were the problems of the occupation and control of Germany—after victory—the complete destruction of her military power, and the assurance that neither the Nazis nor Prussian militarism could again be revived to threaten the peace and the civilization of the world. Second—again for example—there was the settlement of the few differences that remained among us with respect to the International Security Organization after the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. As you remember, at that time, I said that we had agreed ninety percent. Well, that's a pretty good percentage. I think the other ten percent was ironed out at Yalta. Third, there were the general political and economic problems common to all of the areas which had been or would be liberated from the Nazi yoke. This is a very special problem. We over here find it difficult to understand the ramifications of many of these problems in foreign lands, but we are trying to. Fourth, there were the special problems created by a few instances such as Poland and Yugoslavia. Days were spent in discussing these momentous matters and we argued freely and frankly across the table. But at the end, on every point, unanimous agreement was reached. And more important even than the agreement of words, I may say we achieved a unity of thought and a way of getting along together. Of course, we know that it was Hitler's hope—and the German war lords'—that we would not agree—that some slight crack might appear in the solid wall of Allied unity, a crack that would give him and his fellow gangsters one last hope of escaping their just doom. That is the objective for which his propaganda ma- chine has been working for many months. But Hitler has failed. Never before have the major Allies been more closely united—not only in their war aims but also in their peace aims. And they are determined to continue to be united with each other-and with all peace-loving Nations—so that the ideal of lasting peace will become a reality. The Soviet, British, and United States Chiefs of Staff held daily meetings with each other. They conferred frequently with Marshal Stalin, and with Prime Minister Churchill and with me, on the problem of coordinating the strategic and tactical efforts of the Allied powers. They completed their plans for the final knock-out blows to Germany. At the time of the Teheran Conference, the Russian front was removed so far from the American and British fronts that, while certain long-range strategic cooperation was possible, there could be no tactical, day-by-day coordination. They were too far apart. But Russian troops have now crossed Poland. They are fighting on the Eastern soil of Germany herself; British and American troops are now on German soil close to the Rhine River in the West. It is a different situation today from what it was fourteen months ago; a closer tactical liaison has become possible for the first time in Europe—and, in the Crimea Conference, that was something else that was accomplished. Provision was made for daily exchange of information between the armies under the command of General Eisenhower on the western front, and those armies under the command of the Soviet marshals on that long eastern front, and also with our armies in Italy—without the necessity of going through the Chiefs of Staff in Washington or London as in the past. You have seen one result of this exchange of information in the recent bombings by American and English aircraft of points which are directly related to the Russian advance on Berlin. From now on, American and British heavy bombers will be used—in the day-by-day tactics of the war—and we have begun to realize, I think, that there is all the difference in the world between tactics on the one side, and strategy on the other—day-by-day tactics of the war in direct support of the Soviet armies, as well as in the support of our own on the western front. They are now engaged in bombing and strafing in order to hamper the movement of German reserves and materials to the eastern and western fronts from other parts of Germany or from Italy. Arrangements have been made for the most effective distribution of all available material and transportation to the places where they can best be used in the combined war effort—American, British, and Russian. Details of these plans and arrangements are military secrets, of course; but this tying of things in together is going to hasten the day of the final collapse of Germany. The Nazis are learning about some of them already, to their sorrow. And I think all three of us at the Conference felt that they will learn more about them tomorrow and the next day—and the day after that! There will be no respite for them. We will not desist for one moment until unconditional surrender. You know, I've always felt that common sense prevails in the long run—quiet, overnight thinking. I think that is true in Germany, just as much as it is here. The German people, as well as the German soldiers must realize that the sooner they give up and surrender by groups or as individuals, the sooner their present agony will be over. They must realize that only with complete surrender can they begin to reestablish themselves as people whom the world might accept as decent neighbors. We made it clear again at Yalta, and I now repeat that unconditional surrender does not mean the destruction or enslavement of the German people. The Nazi leaders have deliberately withheld that part of the Yalta declaration from the German press and radio. They seek to convince the people of Germany that the Yalta declaration does mean slavery and destruction for them—they are working at it day and night for that is how the Nazis hope to save their own skins, and deceive their people into continued and useless resistance. We did, however, make it clear at the Conference just what unconditional surrender does mean for Germany. It means the temporary control of Germany by Great Britain, Russia, France, and the United States. Each of these Nations will occupy and control a separate zone of Germany—and the administration of the four zones will be coordinated in Berlin by a Control Council composed of representatives of the four Nations. Unconditional surrender means something else. It means the end of Nazism. It means the end of the Nazi Party—and of all its barbaric laws and institutions. It means the termination of all militaristic influence in the public, private, and cultural life of Germany. It means for the Nazi war criminals a punishment that is speedy and just—and severe. It means the complete disarmament of Germany; the destruction of its militarism and its military equipment; the end of its production of armament; the dispersal of all its armed forces; the permanent dismemberment of the German General Staff which has so often shattered the peace of the world. It means that Germany will have to make reparations in kind for the damage which has been done to the innocent victims of its aggression. By compelling reparations in kind—in plants, in machinery, in rolling stock, and in raw materials—we shall avoid the mistake that we and other Nations made after the last war, the demanding of reparations in the form of money which Germany could never pay. We do not want the German people to starve, or to become a burden on the rest of the world. Our objective in handling Germany is simple—it is to secure the peace of the rest of the world now and in the future. Too much experience has shown that that objective is impossible if Germany is allowed to retain any ability to wage aggressive warfare. These objectives will not hurt the German people. On the contrary, they will protect them from a repetition of the fate which the General Staff and Kaiserism imposed on them before, and which Hitlerism is now imposing upon them again a hundredfold. It will be removing a cancer from the German body politic which for generations has produced only misery and only pain to the whole world. During my stay in Yalta, I saw the kind of reckless, senseless fury, the terrible destruction that comes out of German militarism. Yalta, on the Black Sea, had no military significance of any kind. It had no defenses. Before the last war, it had been a resort for people like the Czars and princes and for the aristocracy of Russia—and the hangers-on. However, after the Red Revolution, and until the attack on the Soviet Union by Hitler, the palaces and the villas of Yalta had been used as a rest and recreation center by the Russian people. The Nazi officers took these former palaces and villas—took them over for their own use. The only reason that the so-called former palace of the Czar was still habitable, when we got there, was that it had been given—or he thought it had been given—to a German general for his own property and his own use. And when Yalta was so destroyed, he kept soldiers there to protect what he thought would become his own, nice villa. It was a useful rest and recreation center for hundreds of thousands of Russian workers, farmers, and their families, up to the time that it was taken again by the Germans. The Nazi officers took these places for their own use, and when the Red Army forced the Nazis out of the Crimea—almost just a year ago—all of these villas were looted by the Nazis, and then nearly all of them were destroyed by bombs placed on the inside. And even the humblest of the homes of Yalta were not spared. There was little left of it except blank walls, ruins, destruction and desolation. Sevastopol—that was a fortified port, about forty or fifty miles away—there again was a scene of utter destruction—a large city with great navy yards and fortifications—I think less than a dozen buildings were left intact in the entire city. I had read about Warsaw and Lidice and Rotterdam and Coventry—but I saw Sevastopol and Yalta! And I know that there is not room enough on earth for both German militarism and Christian decency. Of equal importance with the military arrangements at the Crimea Conference were the agreements reached with respect to a general international organization for lasting world peace. The foundations were laid at Dumbarton Oaks. There was one point, however, on which agreement was not reached at Dumbarton Oaks. It involved the procedure of voting in the Security Council. I want to try to make it clear by making it simple. It took me hours and hours to get the thing straight in my own mind—and many conferences. At the Crimea Conference, the Americans made a proposal on this subject which, after full discussion was, I am glad to say, unanimously adopted by the other two Nations. It is not yet possible to announce the terms of that agreement publicly, but it will be in a very short time. When the conclusions reached with respect to voting in the Security Council are made known, I think and I hope that you will find them a fair solution of this complicated and difficult problem. They are founded in justice, and will go far to assure international cooperation in the maintenance of peace. A conference of all the United Nations of the world will meet in San Francisco on April 25, 1945. There, we all hope, and confidently expect, to execute a definite charter of organization under which the peace of the world will be preserved and the forces of aggression permanently outlawed. This time we are not making the mistake of waiting until the end of the war to set up the machinery of peace. This time, as we fight together to win the war finally, we work together to keep it from happening again. I—as you know—have always been a believer in the document called the Constitution of the United States. And I spent a good deal of time in educating two other Nations of the world in regard to the Constitution of the United States. The charter has to be—and should be—approved by the Senate of the United States, under the Constitution. I think the other Nations all know it now. I am aware of that fact, and now all the other Nations are. And we hope that the Senate will approve of what is set forth as the Charter of the United Nations when they all come together in San Francisco next month. The Senate of the United States, through its appropriate representatives, has been kept continuously advised of the program of this Government in the creation of the International Security Organization. The Senate and the House of Representatives will both be represented at the San Francisco Conference. The Congressional delegates to the San Francisco Conference will consist of an equal number of Republican and Democratic members. The American Delegation is—in every sense of the word—bipartisan. World peace is not a party question. I think that Republicans want peace just as much as Democrats. It is not a party question—any more than is military victory—the winning of the war. When the Republic was threatened, first by the Nazi clutch for world conquest back in 1940 and then by the Japanese treachery in 1941, partisanship and politics were laid aside by nearly every American; and every resource was dedicated to our common safety. The same consecration to the cause of peace will be expected, I think, by every patriotic American, and by every human soul overseas. The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, or one party, or one Nation. It cannot be just an American peace, or a British peace, or a Russian, a French, or a Chinese peace. It cannot be a peace of large Nations- or of small Nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world. It cannot be a structure of complete perfection at first. But it can be a peace—and it will be a peace—based on the sound and just principles of the Atlantic Charter—on the concept of the dignity of the human being—and on the guarantees of tolerance and freedom of religious worship. As the Allied armies have marched to military victory, they have liberated people whose liberties had been crushed by the Nazis for four long years, whose economy has been reduced to ruin by Nazi despoilers. There have been instances of political confusion and unrest in these liberated areas—that is not unexpected—as in Greece or in Poland or in Yugoslavia, and there may be more. Worse than that, there actually began to grow up in some of these places queer ideas of, for instance, "spheres of influence" that were incompatible with the basic principles of international collaboration. If allowed to go on unchecked, these developments might have had tragic results in time. It is fruitless to try to place the blame for this situation on one particular Nation or on another. It is the kind of development that is almost inevitable unless the major powers of the world continue without interruption to work together and to assume joint responsibility for the solution of problems that may arise to endanger the peace of the world. We met in the Crimea, determined to settle this matter of liberated areas. Things that might happen that we cannot foresee at this moment might happen suddenly, unexpectedly, next week or next month. And I am happy to confirm to the Congress that we did arrive at a settlement—and, incidentally, a unanimous settlement. The three most powerful Nations have agreed that the political and economic problems of any area liberated from Nazi conquest, or of any former Axis satellite, are a joint responsibility of all three Governments. They will join together, during the temporary period of instability—after hostilities—to help the people of any liberated area, or of any former satellite state, to solve their own problems through firmly established democratic processes. They will endeavor to see to it that the people who carry on the interim government between occupation of Germany and true independence, will be as representative as possible of all democratic elements in the population, and that free elections are held as soon as possible thereafter. Responsibility for political conditions thousands of miles away can no longer be avoided by this great Nation. Certainly, I do not want to live to see another war. As I have said, the world is smaller—smaller every year. The United States now exerts a tremendous influence in the cause of peace throughout all the world. What we people over here are thinking and talking about is in the interest of peace, because it is known all over the world. The slightest remark in either House of the Congress is known all over the world the following day. We will continue to exert that influence, only if we are willing to continue to share in the responsibility for keeping the peace. It will be our own tragic loss, I think, if we were to shirk that responsibility. The final decisions in these areas are going to be made jointly; and therefore they will often be a result of give-and-take compromise. The United States will not always have its way a hundred percent—nor will Russia nor Great Britain. We shall not always have ideal answers—solutions to complicated international problems, even though we are determined continuously to strive toward that ideal. But I am sure that under the agreements reached at Yalta, there will be a more stable political Europe than ever before. Of course, once there has been a free expression of the people's will in any country, our immediate responsibility ends- with the exception only of such action as may be agreed on in the International Security Organization that we hope to set up. The United Nations must also soon begin to help these liberated areas adequately to reconstruct their economy so that they are ready to resume their places in the world. The Nazi war machine has stripped them of raw materials and machine tools and trucks and locomotives. They have left the industry of these places stagnant and much of the agricultural areas are unproductive. The Nazis have left a ruin in their wake. To start the wheels running again is not a mere matter of relief. It is to the national interest that all of us see to it that these liberated areas are again made self-supporting and productive so that they do not need continuous relief from us. I should say that was an argument based on plain common sense. One outstanding example of joint action by the three major Allied powers in the liberated areas was the solution reached on Poland. The whole Polish question was a potential source of trouble in postwar Europe—is it has been sometimes before and we came to the Conference determined to find a common ground for its solution. And we did—even though everybody does not agree with us, obviously. Our objective was to help to create a strong, independent, and prosperous Nation. That is the thing we must always remember, those words, agreed to by Russia, by Britain, and by the United States: the objective of making Poland a strong, independent, and prosperous Nation, with a government ultimately to be selected by the Polish people themselves. To achieve that objective, it was necessary to provide for the formation of a new government much more representative than had been possible while Poland was enslaved. There were, as you know, two governments—one in London, one in Lublin—practically in Russia. Accordingly, steps were taken at Yalta to reorganize the existing Provisional Government in Poland on a broader democratic basis, so as to include democratic leaders now in Poland and those abroad. This new, reorganized government will be recognized by all of us as the temporary government of Poland. Poland needs a temporary government in the worst way—an ad interim government, I think is another way of putting it. However, the new Polish Provisional Government of National Unity will be pledged to holding a free election as soon as possible on the basis of universal suffrage and a secret ballot. Throughout history, Poland has been the corridor through which attacks on Russia have been made. Twice in this generation, Germany has struck at Russia through this corridor. To insure European security and world peace, a strong and independent Poland is necessary to prevent that from happening again. The decision with respect to the boundaries of Poland was, frankly, a compromise. I did not agree with all of it, by any means, but we did not go as far as Britain wanted, in certain areas; we did not go so far as Russia wanted, in certain areas; and we did not go so far as I wanted, in certain areas. It was a compromise. The decision is one, however, under which the Poles will receive compensation in territory in the North and West in exchange for what they lose by the Curzon Line in the East. The limits of the western border will be permanently fixed in the final Peace Conference. We know, roughly, that it will include, in the new, strong Poland, quite a large slice of what now is called Germany. And it was agreed, also, that the new Poland will have a large and long coast line, and many new harbors. Also, that most of East Prussia will go to Poland. A corner of it will go to Russia. Also, that the anomaly of the Free State of Danzig will come to an end; I think Danzig would be a lot better if it were Polish. It is well known that the people east of the Curzon Line—just for example, here is why I compromised—are predominantly white Russian and Ukrainian, they are not Polish; and a very great majority of the people west of the line are predominantly Polish, except in that part of East Prussia and eastern Germany, which will go to the new Poland. As far back as 1919, representatives of the Allies agreed that the Curzon Line represented a fair boundary between the two peoples. And you must remember, also, that there had not been any Polish government before 1919 for a great many generations. I am convinced that the agreement on Poland, under the circumstances, is the most hopeful agreement possible for a free, independent, and prosperous Polish state. The Crimea Conference was a meeting of the three major military powers on whose shoulders rested chief responsibility and burden of the war. Although, for this reason, France was not a participant in the Conference, no one should detract from the recognition that was accorded there of her role in the future of Europe and the future of the world. France has been invited to accept a zone of control in Germany, and to participate as a fourth member of the Allied Control Council of Germany. She has been invited to join as a sponsor of the International Conference at San Francisco next month. She will be a permanent member of the International Security Council together with the other four major powers. And, finally, we have asked that France be associated with us in our joint responsibility over all the liberated areas of Europe. Agreement was reached on Yugoslavia, as announced in the communique; and we hope that it is in process of fulfillment. But, not only there but in some other places, we have to remember that there are a great many prima donnas in the world. All of them wish to be heard before anything becomes final, so we may have a little delay while we listen to more prima donnas. Quite naturally, this Conference concerned itself only with the European war and with the political problems of Europe and not with the Pacific war. In Malta, however, our combined British and American staffs made their plans to increase the attack against Japan. The Japanese war lords know that they are not being over looked. They have felt the force of our B-29's, and our carrier planes; they have felt the naval might of the United States, and do not appear very anxious to come out and try it again. The Japs now know what it means to hear that "The United States Marines have landed." And I think I can add that, having Iwo Jima in mind, "The situation is well in hand." They also know what is in store for the homeland of Japan now that General MacArthur has completed his magnificent march back to Manila and now that Admiral Nimitz is establishing air bases right in the back yard of Japan itself—in Iwo Jima. But, lest somebody else start to stop work in the United States, I repeat what I have so often said, in one short sentence, even in my sleep: "We haven't won the wars yet"—with an s on "wars." It is still a long, tough road to Tokyo. It is longer to go to Tokyo than it is to Berlin, in every sense of the word. The defeat of Germany will not mean the end of the war against Japan. On the contrary, we must be prepared for a long and costly struggle in the Pacific. But the unconditional surrender of Japan is as essential as the defeat of Germany. I say that advisedly, with the thought in mind that that is especially true if our plans for world peace are to succeed. For Japanese militarism must be wiped out as thoroughly as German militarism. On the way back from the Crimea, I made arrangements to meet personally King Farouk of Egypt, Halle Selassie, the Emperor of Ethiopia, and King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia. Our conversations had to do with matters of common interest. They will be of great mutual advantage because they gave me, and a good many of us, an opportunity of meeting and talking face to face, and of exchanging views in personal conversation instead of formal correspondence. For instance, on the problem of Arabia, I learned more about that whole problem—the Moslem problem, the Jewish problem—by talking with Ibn Saud for five minutes, than I could have learned in the exchange of two or three dozen letters. On my voyage, I had the benefit of seeing the Army and Navy and the Air Force at work. All Americans, I think, would feel as proud of our armed forces as I am, if they could see and hear what I saw and heard. Against the most efficient professional soldiers and sailors and airmen of all history, our men stood and fought—and won. This is our chance to see to it that the sons and the grandsons of these gallant fighting men do not have to do it all over again in a few years. The Conference in the Crimea was a turning point—I hope in our history and therefore in the history of the world. There will soon be presented to the Senate of the United States and to the American people a great decision that will determine the fate of the United States—and of the world—for generations to come. There can be no middle ground here. We shall have to take the responsibility for world collaboration, or we shall have to bear the responsibility for another world conflict. I know that the word "planning" is not looked upon with favor in some circles. In domestic affairs, tragic mistakes have been made by reason of lack of planning; and, on the other hand, many great improvements in living. and many benefits to the human race, have been accomplished as a result of adequate, intelligent planning—reclamation of desert areas, developments of whole river valleys, and provision for adequate housing. The same will be true in relations between Nations. For the second time in the lives of most of us this generation is face to face with the objective of preventing wars. To meet that objective, the Nations of the world will either have a plan or they will not. The groundwork of a plan has now been furnished, and has been submitted to humanity for discussion and decision. No plan is perfect. Whatever is adopted at San Francisco will doubtless have to be amended time and again over the years, just as our own Constitution has been. No one can say exactly how long any plan will last. Peace can endure only so long as humanity really insists upon it, and is willing to work for it—and sacrifice for it. Twenty-five years ago, American fighting men looked to the statesmen of the world to finish the work of peace for which they fought and suffered. We failed them then. We cannot fail them again, and expect the world again to survive. The Crimea Conference was a successful effort by the three leading Nations to find a common ground for peace. It ought to spell the end of the system of unilateral action, the exclusive alliances, the spheres of influence, the balances of power, and all the other expedients that have been tried for centuries—and have always failed. We propose to substitute for all these, a universal organization in which all peace-loving Nations will finally have a chance to join. I am confident that the Congress and the American people will accept the results of this Conference as the beginnings of a permanent structure of peace upon which we can begin to build, under God, that better world in which our children and grandchildren—yours and mine, the children and grandchildren of the whole world- must live, and can live. And that, my friends, is the principal message I can give you. But I feel it very deeply, as I know that all of you are feeling it today, and are going to feel it in the future.

More Franklin D. Roosevelt speeches

This website uses cookies

We place some essential cookies on your device to make this website work. We'd like to use additional cookies to remember your settings and understand how you use our services. This information will help us make improvements to the website.

Yalta Conference

Extract from the Yalta Protocol – the agreements signed by Britain, the USA and the USSR at the Yalta Conference, February 1945 (Catalogue ref: FO 371/50838)

PROTOCOL OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CRIMEA CONFERENCE

THE Crimea Conference of the Heads of the Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which took place from the 4 th -11 th February, came to the following conclusions-:

I.–World Organisation. It was decided:

• That a United Nations conference on the proposed World Organization should be summoned for Wednesday, 25 April, 1945, and should be held in the United States of America.
• a. the United Nations as they existed on 8 Feb., 1945; and
• b. Such of the Associated Nations as have declared war on the common enemy by 1 March, 1945. When the conference on World Organization is held, the delegates of the United Kingdom and United States of America will support a proposal to admit to original membership two Soviet Socialist Republics, i.e., the Ukraine and White Russia.
• That the United States Government, on behalf of the three powers, should consult the Government of China and the French Provisional Government in regard to decisions taken at the present conference concerning the proposed World Organization.

C. Voting “1. Each member of the Security Council should have one vote. “2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members. “3. Decisions of the Security Council on all matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members, including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VIII, Section A and under the second sentence of Paragraph 1 of Chapter VIII, Section C, a party to a dispute should abstain from voting.’

II. DECLARATION OF LIBERATED EUROPE The following declaration has been approved: … The establishment of order in Europe and the rebuilding of national economic life must be achieved by processes which will enable the liberated peoples to destroy the last vestiges of nazism and fascism and to create democratic institutions of their own choice. This is a principle of the Atlantic Charter – the right of all people to choose the form of government under which they will live – the restoration of sovereign rights and self-government to those peoples who have been forcibly deprived of them by the aggressor nations. To foster the conditions in which the liberated people may exercise these rights, the three governments will jointly assist the people in any European liberated state or former Axis state in Europe where, in their judgment conditions require,

• a. to establish conditions of internal peace;
• b. to carry out emergency relief measures for the relief of distressed peoples;
• c. to form interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population and pledged to the earliest possible establishment through free elections of Governments responsive to the will of the people; and
• d. to facilitate where necessary the holding of such elections.

V.  REPARATION The following protocol has been approved: Protocol On the Talks Between the Heads of Three Governments at the Crimean Conference on the Question of the German Reparations in Kind

i. Germany must pay in kind for the losses caused by her to the Allied nations in the course of the war. Reparations are to be received in the first instance by those countries which have borne the main burden of the war, have suffered the heaviest losses and have organized victory over the enemy.

ii. Reparation in kind is to be exacted from Germany in three following forms:

• a. Removals … of equipment, machine tools, ships, rolling stock, German investments abroad, shares of industrial, transport … these removals to be carried out chiefly for the purpose of destroying the war potential of Germany.
• b. (b) Annual deliveries of goods from current production for a period to be fixed.
• c. (c) Use of German labour.

iii. For the working out on the above principles of a detailed plan for exaction of reparation from Germany an Allied reparation commission will be set up in Moscow. It will consist of three representatives – one from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, one from the United Kingdom and one from the United States of America.

iv. With regard to the fixing of the total sum of the reparation as well as the distribution of it among the countries which suffered from the German aggression, the Soviet and American delegations agreed as follows: “The Moscow reparation commission should take in its initial studies as a basis for discussion the suggestion of the Soviet Government that the total sum of the reparation in accordance with the points (a) and (b) of the Paragraph 2 should be 22 billion dollars and that 50 per cent should go to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.”

The British delegation was of the opinion that, pending consideration of the reparation question by the Moscow reparation commission, no figures of reparation should be mentioned. The above Soviet-American proposal has been passed to the Moscow Reparation Committee as one of the proposals to be considered by the Commission.

VI . Major War Criminals

The Conference agreed the question of the major war criminals should be the subject of enquiry by the three Foreign Secretaries for report in due course after the close of the Conference.

Documents on the same theme

• An Ordinary Man, His Extraordinary Journey
• Hours/Admission
• Nearby Dining and Lodging
• Information
• Library Collections
• Online Collections
• Photographs
• Harry S. Truman Papers
• Federal Records
• Personal Papers
• Appointment Calendar
• Audiovisual Materials Collection
• President Harry S. Truman's Cabinet
• President Harry S. Truman's White House Staff
• Researching Our Holdings
• Collection Policy and Donating Materials
• Truman Family Genealogy
• To Secure These Rights
• Freedom to Serve
• Events and Programs
• Featured programs
• Civics for All of US
• Civil Rights Teacher Workshop
• High School Trivia Contest
• Teacher Lesson Plans
• Truman Library Teacher Conference 2024
• National History Day
• Student Resources
• Truman Library Teachers Conference
• Truman Presidential Inquiries
• Student Research File
• The Truman Footlocker Project
• Truman Trivia
• The White House Decision Center
• Three Branches of Government
• Electing Our Presidents Teacher Workshop
• National History Day Workshops from the National Archives
• Research grants
• Truman Library History
• Contact Staff
• Volunteer Program
• Internships
• Educational Resources

Yalta Conference Activity

Students will fulfill the role of the political leaders at the Conference at Yalta and reenact the conference.  They will debate the issues discussed at the conference to determine if they come to the same ends as what actually happened in 1945.  Students will then predict the implications of the conference on the course of the Cold War and our world today.

Many historians agree that basis of the Cold War began at the Conference of Yalta in February 1945.  The leaders at the talks have been criticized for putting the world on the path that polarized the two super powers.  Through this role-play activity, students will become conscious of the motivated factors that led the delegates to come to their conclusions and realize the impact of these decisions.

The Conference at Yalta was the critical point that changed the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union from that of allies to rivals.  The positioning for dominance in the post-World War II world would continue throughout the Cold War and especially during the Truman presidency.  The decisions made during the Conference at Yalta and the Truman Administration still are affecting the world today.

Students will develop an understanding of how the implications of decisions made decades ago are still making an impact in the world today.

MO Standards: 

2. Continuity and change in the history of Missouri, the United States and the world

6. Relationships of the individual and groups to institutions and cultural traditions

7. The use of tools of social science inquiry (such as surveys, statistics, maps, documents)

2aD-Describe and evaluate the evolution of the United States domestic and foreign policy including the Cold War.

2bG-Examine the wars of the 20th century, including:  causes, comparisons, consequences, and peace efforts.

3B-Compare and contrast governmental systems, current and historical, including those that are democratic and totalitarian.

7B-Distinguish between primary and secondary sources.

Kansas Standards

Benchmark 3: The student uses a working knowledge and understanding of individuals, groups, ideas, developments, and turning points in the era of the Cold War (1945-1990).

1. (K) explains why the United States emerged as a superpower as the result of World War II.

2.(A) analyzes the origins of the Cold War (e.g., establishment of the Soviet Bloc, Mao’s victory in China, Marshall Plan, Berlin Blockade, Iron Curtain).

3. (A) evaluates the foreign policies of Truman and Eisenhower during the Cold War (e.g., establishment of the United Nations, containment, NATO, Truman Doctrine, Berlin Blockade, Korean War, Iron Curtain, U-2 incident).

Ferrell, Robert H.  Harry S. Truman:  A Life.  Columbia, MO:  University of Missouri Press, 1994.

The following is a list of suggested primary sources.

The Yalta Conference Agreement-

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/yalta.asp

The UN https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/online-collections/united-nations-1945-1953

Documents concerning Germany and the Berlin Airlift

Documents concerning Japan and the decision to drop the atomic bomb

Documents concerning the Cold War in the Truman Presidency

Primary and secondary sources may be acquired via the Internet

Students will be divided into groups to fulfill the roles of Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin at the Conference at Yalta.   Each group will be provided the role sheet for their respective country noted below.  Students will be under strict instruction to fulfill their roles as opposed to personal contemporary beliefs.  Students will familiarize themselves with their roles using the sheets and by conducting additional research using the sources noted above.  Students will then write a paragraph on each issue to prepare a statement of their beliefs and talking points to be pursued in the debate. 

            At a subsequent class, a debate will be held to discuss each issue and determine which option the delegates will agree to at the Conference of Yalta.  Following the debate, a class discussion will debrief the students to determine how closely they mirrored history and discuss the difficulties of the debate considering the factors influencing them.

            Finally, students will examine each of the issues discussed at the Conference of Yalta and trace their development through the Truman Presidency to the modern era.  They will fill out the Yalta Conference Lives On worksheet.  This can be done as a homework assignment or a class project with teacher guidance.

Conference at Yalta

Setting:  World War II is nearly over.  Even though Japan continues to fight on, Italy has been knocked out of the war, and Germany appears to be in the final weeks before it is forced to surrender.  The principle members of the Allies will meet once again to discuss the progress of the war.  However, unlike previous meetings which discussed war tactics, victory in Europe is a forgone conclusion.  The scope of this conference will focus on what to do in the time period following World War II.

Task:  As diplomats of the primary Allied countries, it will be your job to represent your country’s wishes at the Conference at Yalta.  Read the descriptor page describing your country’s desires on various issues concerning World War II and the post-war era.  Determine your country’s position on each of the topics to be discussed at the conference.  Be prepared to defend your country’s stand on the issues and willingness to negotiate a resolve with the other Allied leaders.

Principle Leaders:

            Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of Great Britain

            Franklin Roosevelt, President of the United States

            Joseph Stalin, Premier of the Soviet Union

Key Issues:

• World Organization
• Liberated Nations
• Post-War Germany
• Post-War Poland
• Continued War in Japan

Great Britain 

Leader:  Winston Churchill, Prime Minister

*Recognized British politician for over 60 years.

*Veteran of the Boer War and World War I.

*Recognized the Treaty of Versailles had failed and in part led to World War II.

*Predicted the appeasement policy of Neville Chamberlain at the Munich Conference would fail.

*Agreed to the Atlantic Charter with Franklin Roosevelt, which supported self-determination and a new League of Nations.

*Led Great Britain through World War II.  Swore Great Britain would “Never give in” to Adolf Hitler and Germany.

Primary Concerns:

*Feared Great Britain was going to lose power and prestige to the “super powers” following World War II.  Fear of losing control of the British Empire

*Supported democratic nations in Europe and had even housed exile governments during World War II when Germany had invaded their countries (most notably, Lublin government of Poland).

*Had been destroyed by Germany.

United States

Leader:  Franklin Roosevelt, President

*Led the United States through the Great Depression and World War II.

*Had recently been elected to and began serving his fourth term as President.

*Was in very poor health as those close to him saw he was very near to death.

*Agreed to the Atlantic Charter with Winston Churchill, which supported self-determination and a new League of Nations.

*Twice the United States had been pulled into World Wars.  Wanted to ensure calamities of this nature would never happen again.  United States had a policy of isolationism.

*As America was the “Experiment in Democracy,” there is the desire and belief in the spread of democracy to other countries.

*Greatest number of American deaths was in the Pacific Theater of World War II.  Although Joseph Stalin had asked for assistance in Europe and it was returned with the D-Day invasion and additional support was provided in the Lend-Lease Plan, the Soviet Union had yet to mount an attack against Japan.

Soviet Union

Leader:  Joseph Stalin, Premier

*Leader of the Soviet Union following the death of Vladimir Lenin in 1924.

*In attempts of internal reforms, Stalin led the Soviet Union to economic calamity during collectivization attempts.

*Was very paranoid of threats to his control of the Soviet Union and threats of attacks from outside nations.  Within the country, purges were stages to eliminate any threats to his power.  Information from foreign nations were limited and censored while Soviet secrets were not released.

*The Soviet Union suffered the greatest number of deaths (by far) of any of the Allied nations at the conference.

*Germany had twice invaded the Soviet Union (officially Russia the first time) during the World Wars.  Both had led to great loss of territory and millions of lives.  Wants to ensure Germany will never be able to attack their country again.

*Soviet armies had defeated the German forces in Eastern Europe with little help from the other Allied nations.

Diplomacy Sheet

Yalta Conference Lives On

Students will be required to write a paragraph on each of the issues discussed at the debate.  They are expected to write a paragraph on which option they prefer and defend their support of that option.  They will bring this paper to the debate and use it as talking points in the course of the debate.

            Following the debate, students will be required to fill out the Yalta Conference Lives On sheet to relate the impact of the resolution on the course of history.

Yalta: World War Two summit that reshaped the world

• Published 4 February 2020

The Big Three - Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin

In February 1945, three men met in a holiday resort to decide the fate of the world.

Nazi Germany was on its knees. Soviet troops were closing in on Berlin, while Allied forces had crossed Germany's western border. In the Pacific, US troops were steadily but bloodily advancing towards Japan.

As their armies poised for victory, the so-called Big Three - US President Franklin Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin - agreed to meet in Yalta, a Soviet resort on the Black Sea.

At the end of the bloodiest conflict the world had ever known, 75 years ago, the Allies wanted to stop such devastation from ever happening again.

But both the US and the USSR wanted co-operation on their own terms. Despite the Yalta agreements, within months the stage was set for the Cold War - the struggle between the two new superpowers that split the globe into ideological camps for decades.

This video can not be played

To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.

Watch footage of the Big Three at Yalta in 1945

"If the goal at Yalta was to lay the basis for a genuinely peaceful post-war order, then the conference failed," Prof Andrew Bacevich at Boston University told the BBC. "But given the contradictory aspirations of the US and USSR, that goal was never in the cards."

What was happening in February 1945?

By the start of 1945 Nazi Germany had lost the war. The country maintained its bloody and increasingly desperate resistance, but the result of the conflict was no longer in doubt.

In eastern Europe, the Soviet Union had turned the tide and shattered Germany's armies after four years of savage warfare.

But while the USSR was militarily triumphant - about three-quarters of all German troop casualties in the war died on the Eastern Front - the country had suffered terribly.

After more than three years of war, the Soviet Union had crushed Germany's forces and was just miles from Berlin

It is estimated that one in seven Soviet citizens, some 27 million people, died in the conflict - two-thirds of whom were civilians. Some academics put the numbers even higher.

The country's cities and richest lands were devastated by the conflict. Industry, farms, homes and even roads had been wiped from the landscape.

What were the leaders' goals?

Joseph Stalin was determined to get his country back on its feet. He came to Yalta seeking a sphere of influence in eastern Europe as a buffer zone to protect the USSR. He also wanted to divide Germany, to ensure it could never pose a threat again, and to take huge reparations - in money, machinery and even men - to help his shattered nation.

Why Russia is still fighting world's biggest tank battle

Russia-Poland row over start of WW2 escalates

Stalin knew he would need the acceptance of the Western powers to achieve this.

Winston Churchill understood Stalin's goals. The pair had met in Moscow in October 1944, and discussed the idea of carving Europe into spheres of influence for the USSR and the western powers. He also understood that the millions of Soviet troops that had pushed Germany out of central and eastern Europe far outnumbered the Allied forces in the west - and there was nothing the UK could do if Stalin chose to keep them there.

Poland's eastern border with the USSR was not finalised until the early 1950s

The UK had declared war in September 1939 because Germany had invaded its ally, Poland, and Churchill was determined to ensure the country's freedom. The UK however had also paid a heavy price for victory, and was now essentially bankrupt. Churchill hoped the US would support him and stand up to Stalin.

But US President Roosevelt had his own priorities. He wanted Stalin to sign up to the United Nations - a new global peacekeeping body for the post-war world.

Prof Melvyn Leffler at the University of Virginia told the BBC that Roosevelt was well aware how acrimony between allies after World War One had led the US to step back from world politics in the 1920s and 1930s. "What Roosevelt wanted most of all was to avert a return to American isolationism," he said.

UN: Seventy years of changing the world

What is the United Nations and what does it do?

The president also wanted the Soviet Union to declare war on Japan. Though the tide had dramatically turned against the Japanese Empire, their forces were still inflicting heavy casualties on advancing US forces in the Pacific. Anxiety about a bloody invasion of the Japanese home islands loomed large in US strategic thinking.

What happened at Yalta?

Although Roosevelt wanted to meet somewhere in the Mediterranean, Stalin - who had a fear of flying , external - instead offered up Yalta. Group talks took place between 4-11 February at the US delegation's residence, Livadia Palace, which was once the summer home of Russia's last Tsar, Nicholas II.

The three leaders had met before, at Tehran in 1943. Roosevelt was more willing to trust Stalin than was Churchill, who saw the Soviet leader as an increasingly dangerous threat.

The group talks at the Yalta summit took place at the Livadia Palace

After a week of talks, the Big Three announced their decisions to the world. Following its unconditional surrender, Germany would be broken apart. The leaders agreed in principle to four occupation zones, one for each country at Yalta and also for France, and the same division of Berlin.

A declaration also said Germany would pay reparations "to the greatest extent possible" , external , and a commission would be created in Moscow to determine how much they owed.

The leaders also agreed to democratic elections throughout liberated Europe - including for Poland, which would have a new government "with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from Poles abroad". The Soviet Union had already placed a provisional Communist government in Warsaw, which they agreed would be expanded.

Poland still counts losses from WW2 invasion

Five states remember victims of WW2 'misery' pact

But democracy meant something very different to Stalin. Though he publicly agreed to free elections for liberated Europe, his forces were already seizing key offices of state across central and eastern European countries for local communist parties.

Moreover, the leaders decided - at Stalin's urging - that Poland's borders were to move westward, giving land to the USSR. The Baltic States would also join the Soviet Union.

Berlin was a divided city until 1989

Historian Anne Applebaum wrote in her text Iron Curtain that the leaders "decided the fate of whole swathes of Europe with amazing insouciance". Roosevelt "half-heartedly" asked Stalin if the city of Lwow might stay a part of Poland, but did not push the idea, and it was quickly dropped.

Roosevelt was more focused on his plan for the United Nations, and he got his wish. All three nations agreed to send delegates to San Francisco on 25 April 1945, to help set up the new international organisation. What's more, Stalin pledged to launch an invasion of Japan three months after the defeat of Germany.

Churchill remained deeply concerned about the situation in eastern Europe after the summit, despite the agreements. He urged his forces and the Americans to move as far east as possible before the end of the war.

What happened afterwards?

Within months, the political situation had changed dramatically. Roosevelt died of a massive brain haemorrhage in April, and was replaced by Harry Truman. Germany surrendered unconditionally in May. And on 16 July, the US successfully tested its new secret weapon - the nuclear bomb. The very next day, President Truman met Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin at the Potsdam conference outside Berlin.

Truman did not know Stalin, and had been president for just four months. Winston Churchill, in power since May 1940, was replaced halfway through the conference by Clement Atlee after the 1945 general election.

Clement Attlee, Harry Truman and Joseph Stalin met at Potsdam after the end of the war in Europe

The mood at the conference was very different. US policymakers felt more confident after realising the power of the atomic bomb. Truman was far more sceptical of Stalin than Roosevelt had been. He and his advisers believed the USSR had no desire to stick to the Yalta accords.

In less than two years, the US president announced the so-called Truman Doctrine, which pledged US power to contain Soviet expansion efforts around the world. The Cold War had begun.

Both Churchill and Roosevelt were later criticised for giving way to Stalin at Yalta. But practically, there was little the US and UK could do. Stalin already had troops throughout central and eastern Europe. After Yalta, Churchill commissioned a plan of attack against the USSR - codenamed Operation Unthinkable - but British military planners realised it was totally unrealistic.

Prof Leffler says that "what Yalta did in regard to eastern Europe was simply to acknowledge the power realities that existed at the time".

More on this story

• Published 31 December 2019

• Published 31 August 2019

• Published 23 August 2019

Soviet film shows 1943 assault on Nazi troops. Video, 00:01:12 Soviet film shows 1943 assault on Nazi troops

• Published 12 July 2019

Why so many Russians like dictator Stalin

• Published 18 April 2019

The war warnings Stalin ignored

• Published 21 June 2011

Yalta Conference

Feb 20, 2013

160 likes | 276 Views

Yalta Conference. CRIMEA CONFERENCE, UKRAINE February 1945. Stalin. Churchill. FDR. AGREEMENT AT YALTA. DIVIDE GERMANY INTO FOUR (4) ZONES TO BE OCCUPIED AFTER THE WAR BY: BRITAIN FRANCE USA USSR. WHAT ELSE DID WE AGREE TO?. ELECTIONS WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNTRIES OF EASTERN EUROPE

Share Presentation

• potsdam conference
• specific examples
• germany surrenders may
• support view
• future world peace

Presentation Transcript

Yalta Conference CRIMEA CONFERENCE, UKRAINE February 1945

Stalin Churchill FDR

AGREEMENT AT YALTA • DIVIDE GERMANY INTO FOUR (4) ZONES TO BE OCCUPIED AFTER THE WAR BY: • BRITAIN • FRANCE • USA • USSR

WHAT ELSE DID WE AGREE TO? • ELECTIONS WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNTRIES OF EASTERN EUROPE • GOVERNMENT OF POLAND WILL BE BOTH COMMUNIST & NON-COMMUNIST • SET UP THE UNITED NATIONS!!!!!

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED? • STALIN NEVER HELD FREE ELECTIONS IN POLAND • FDR DIED ONLY TWO (2) MONTHS LATER • TRUMAN (NEXT PRESIDENT) WOULD ATTEND THE NEXT POST-WAR CONFERENCE • HITLER DIES APRIL 30 • GERMANY SURRENDERS MAY 2, 1945

“The SOVIET UNION HAS BEOME A DANGER TO THE FREE WORLD.” Churchill wrote this to Roosevelt after the Yalta Conference. The leaders of the three countries would meet one more time: Potsdam

Potsdam Conference: JULY 1945 • Truman replaces FDR • Churchill gets voted out of Office • Stalin remains • Intent on seeking reparations and as much as they can get from Germany. • Agreements: -Four zones of occupation in Germany -Bring Nazi War Criminals to trial.

DISAGREEMENTS • ALLIES DID NOT AGREE ON • HOW TO DIVIDE GERMANY • THE AMOUNT OF REPARATIONS GERMANY SHOULD PAY • SOVIET POLICY IN EASTERN EUROPE

COLD WAR BEGINS • During 1946-47, Stalin made sure that Communist governments came to power in all the countries of Eastern Europe. • CALLED: SALAMI TACTICS • The Communist description of this process was “slicing salami,” - gradually getting rid of all opposition.

WHAT DID RUSSIA TAKE? • A. Albania (1945)- • B. Bulgaria (1945)- • C. Poland (1947)- • D. Hungary (1947)- • E. Romania (1945-1947)- • F. Czechoslovakia (1945-1947)- • G. East Germany (1949)-

HOW DID THE REST OF THE ALLIES REACT? • 5 MARCH 1946, Winston Churchill • ‘a shadow had fallen on Eastern Europe, which was now cut off from the free world by ‘an iron curtain.’ Behind that line, he said, the people of Eastern Europe were ‘subject to Soviet influence…totalitarian control [and] police governments.’

EUROPE: END OF WWII 1945

SOVIET DOMINATION OF EASTER EUROPE: 1946

WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS MEANS?

ASSIGNMENT: PARAGRAPHS • QUESTION: 2 Paragraphs 5-7 sentences each. • Was the Yalta Conference a success or a failure in promoting future world peace? • INSTRUCTIONS: • Topic sentence • Take a Stand • Support your view with specific examples from your notes or text. • Give an opposing point of view • Conclude.

• More by User

The Yalta Conference

The Yalta Conference. Division of Germany and Europe After World War II. The Potsdam Conference: Beginning of the Cold War. The Truman Doctrine. The “containment” of communism primary goal Takes three basic formats: economic assistance to allies (the Marshall Plan)

745 views • 48 slides

Yalta and Potsdam

348 views • 2 slides

WELCOME TO YALTA!

WELCOME TO YALTA!. School of the Future Yalta Ukraine. Ukraine is a country in Eastern Europe. It has an area of 603,628 km².

333 views • 14 slides

Yalta Conference, February, 1945 Churchill, FDR, Stalin

Yalta Conference, February, 1945 Churchill, FDR, Stalin. Yalta Conference Stalin promised to enter the war against Japan 3 months after Germany surrendered. (Germany surrendered on May 7 –> The S.U. Would declare war on Japan on August 8)

493 views • 22 slides

Yalta Conference. Took place February 1945 before WWII was over (V-E Day May 8 1945) Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill ( Big 3 ) met in Yalta in the Soviet Union to discuss post WWII How to deal with the defeated or liberated countries of eastern Europe was the main

801 views • 30 slides

Yalta and Potsdam:

Yalta and Potsdam: . L/O: To consider how and why the agreements at Yalta and Potsdam where different and to understand their significance for post war relations

476 views • 19 slides

Yalta and Potsdam.

150 views • 1 slides

UAIB Conference June 1 8 - 21 , 2009, Yalta Sándor Szalai Deputy CEO – regional operation

Need for Liberalization in legal Legislation T he Focus on Money Market Funds (MMFs). UAIB Conference June 1 8 - 21 , 2009, Yalta Sándor Szalai Deputy CEO – regional operation OTP Fund Management Ltd. Motto.

287 views • 21 slides

Yalta Conference. In February 1945 (before V-E or V-J Days), Churchill, Stalin, and Roosevelt meet in Yalta, USSR to decide on the fate of Germany and the post-war world. The Argument. Stalin wanted Germany divided up so they could never again threaten the Soviet Union

761 views • 41 slides

Yalta Conference. Yalta Conference. Key points of the meeting are as follows: Agreement to for the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany.

399 views • 5 slides

Yalta Conference:

Yalta Conference: February 1945 - British, U.S., and Soviet leaders met in Yalta (in the Ukraine). The leaders agreed on the occupation of post-war Germany BEFORE Victory in Europe/V-E Day on May 8, 1945. Yalta Conference. At this Allied Conference the following was decided:

1.25k views • 28 slides

The Yalta Conference and the Potsdam Conference ( 1945)

The Yalta Conference and the Potsdam Conference ( 1945). L/O: to know the decisions made about Germany by the allies Starter: If you were Winston Churchill in 1945 what would be your priority in deciding Germany’s future ?

459 views • 19 slides

The Cold War 1943-56 1943 Tehran Conference. 1945 Yalta Conference 1945 Potsdam Conference

USA. Soviet Union. Roosevelt until 1945. The Cold War 1943-56 1943 Tehran Conference. 1945 Yalta Conference 1945 Potsdam Conference 1947 The Truman doctrine 1947 Marshall Plan 1947 Com inform 1949 Com econ 1947 Bizonia 1948-49 The Berlin Blockade 1948-49 The Berlin Airlift

720 views • 8 slides

Yalta Conference. CRIMEA CONFERENCE, UKRAINE February 1945. AGREEMENT AT YALTA. DIVIDE GERMANY INTO FOUR (4) ZONES TO BE OCCUPIED AFTER THE WAR BY: BRITAIN FRANCE USA USSR. WHAT ELSE DID WE AGREE TO?. ELECTIONS WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNTRIES OF EASTERN EUROPE

279 views • 16 slides

The U.N., Yalta Conference and Potsdam Conference

The U.N., Yalta Conference and Potsdam Conference. Warm-up. After World War II, how would you stop another World War from ever happening again?. Announcements. Test- Tuesday Debate-Monday Homework-Review sheet. The Yalta Conference (February, 1945).

569 views • 19 slides

What were the results of the Yalta Conference and the Potsdam Conference?

Do Now: Explain, in brief, the ideological differences between the USA & the USSR in 1945. What were the results of the Yalta Conference and the Potsdam Conference?. L.O: Can I explain the results of the Yalta and the Potsdam Conference?. The Background Knowledge.

335 views • 9 slides

Preparations for the Conference in Yalta

Preparations for the Conference in Yalta. Determination of place and date of summit. Why Yalta? Roosevelt’s goals at the conference: World organization; Questions regarding Germany; Questions regarding the Far East; Stalin’s goals at the conference:

54 views • 5 slides

Yalta and Potsdam Conferences 1945

Lesson starter: Write a list of the main reasons for tension between the USA and the USSR. Yalta and Potsdam Conferences 1945. Today we will understand the decisions made at two key conferences – Yalta and Potsdam.

164 views • 12 slides

The Yalta & Potsdam Conferences

The Yalta & Potsdam Conferences. to consider whether the Cold War started in1945. In the beginning…. In may 1945 American troops entered Berlin from the west, as Russian troops moved in from the East. They met and celebrated victory together.

190 views • 14 slides

Yalta vs Potsdam

Yalta vs Potsdam. Winston Churchill, in a telegram dated 17 February 1945, thanking Stalin for his 'hospitality and friendship' at the Yalta Conference.

92 views • 8 slides

WWII: The Yalta Conference

Description

The Yalta Conference was a significant event in World War II history and profoundly impacted the post-war world order. This lesson plan includes a PowerPoint presentation that covers the background, objectives, and outcomes of the conference.

The PowerPoint includes various student activities that make the lesson engaging and interactive. These activities include a source analysis of a photograph of the Big Three (Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin), a political cartoon analysis, a map analysis, and a short film.

The source analysis of the photograph is an excellent way to encourage critical thinking skills in your students. They can analyse the leaders’ body language, facial expressions, and clothing to understand their attitudes and intentions during the Yalta conference. This activity helps students develop historical perspective and interpretive skills.

Similarly, the political cartoon analysis encourages students to analyse the cartoon’s symbolism, humour, and bias to understand the public perception of the conference. This activity helps students develop analytical skills and encourages them to think critically about propaganda.

The map source is also an effective way to help students visualise the political and geographic impact of the Yalta conference.

Finally, the short film in the lesson plan PowerPoint provides a visual and auditory component to the lesson, which can reinforce the key concepts and historical background.

Overall, this lesson plan for the Yalta Conference is a comprehensive and engaging way to help your students understand the conference’s historical significance. The various student activities, such as source analysis, political cartoon analysis, map analysis, and short film, encourage critical thinking, analytical skills, and historical perspective. Using this lesson plan can help your students develop a deeper understanding of this pivotal moment in world history.

Questions & Answers

Cunning history teacher.

• We're hiring
• Help & FAQ
• Privacy policy
• Student privacy
• Terms of service
• Tell us what you think