Berlin Blockade Document Analysis

1. What type of document is this? What is its purpose?      
  Both documents are reports and memorandums from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  The purpose of these documents is to report on the decisions being made by the Soviet Union regarding Berlin and West Germany.


2. When was it written? Why is that significant?     
 They were written on June 30, 1948 and that is significant because they are events that had just happened and were probably events that the Soviet Union did not want the rest of the war knowing about.


3. Who created the document? Who received the document?     
 They were written by R.H. Hillenkoetter in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) created the document for President Truman.


4. Who is Marshal Sokolovsky?     
 Marshal Sokolovsky is an official from the Soviet Union who met with German officials about how the Berlin Blockade would affect East Germany and how to solve this issue. He decides to let the West feed their own parts of Berlin (West Berlin).


5. How did the CIA get information of the meeting between Marshal Sokolovsky and German members of the German industrial committee?      
   The CIA had a spy or imformant at the conference who supplied them with information.
  

6. What were the three Soviet alternatives as they presented themselves when this document was written? What policy did the Soviets pursue over the course of the next nine months? Why?     

 The three alternative were to start a war with the USA, Britain, and France, stop the blockade, or just let the three western countries take care of feeding the people in West Berlin.  They felt that they were not in a good position to start a war because they did not have the supplies to do so and that if they lifted the blockade they would look weak.  Therefore, having the West feed their people was the best option and would create a challenge for those countries and Soviet wanted to create hardships for them.

7. Stalin stated in a speech on February 9, 1946, "he [Stalin] blamed the last war on 'capitalist monopolies' and warning that, since the same forces still operated, the USSR must treble the basic materials of national defense such as iron and steel, double coal and oil production, and to delay the manufacture of consumer goods until rearmament was complete." Who are the "capitalist monopolies?" How does this statement enlighten the Soviet viewpoint against the United States? Were the Allies justified in canceling the shipments of German reparations to the Soviets at the end of World War II? Why did the Soviets rely so heavily on Germany for food and industry?        
  The capitalist monopolies are American and British companies.  This statement enlightens the Soviet viewpoint against the US.  That is because Stalin is saying that companies of the US and Britain are responsible for starving people and the lack of goods for the people in the country.  This would make the Soviets seem like the victims and the US seem like an attacker out to kill innocent people.  Also, although it does not seem fair, the Allies were justified in stopping the Soviets from taking such a large amount of money from Germany.  Even though the Soviet Union lost many men in the war, punishing Germany too harshly would risk another war and, with the discovery of the atomic bomb, they might actually have been able to take over the world in World War III.  The lack of money was especially unfortunate for the Soviet Union because they desperately relied on Germany for food and industry because the rest of the Soviet Union, mainly Russia, was in a drought.  This meant that the rest of the Soviet Union could not grow food, so they needed German food.

The Berlin Blockade and Airlift

1. What is Source 37 (p. 75) saying about Josip Tito, leader of Yugoslavia?     
  Source 37 states that Josip Tito is not loyal to the Soviet Union and is greedy.  The Source shows that he is not loyal by making him wear a cloak that says "Judas" and Judas is the ultimate betrayer in history, having been the one who betrayed Jesus.  So he is a betrayer because he is interacting with the United States by accepting their money and the USSR, whose government he was part of, hated the USA.  Tito is also shown as being greedy because he will do anything, even beg America, to obtain money.  That is what Source 37 shows about Josip Titio.


2. Why do you think Stalin was so hostile to Tito?        
  Stalin was so hostile to Tito because he was afraid of losing control of Yugoslavia.  Originally, Yugoslavia was only country to resist being taken over by the USSR, thus already being a threat to the government.  Then when Tito was contemplating taking the Marshall Aid money, he was even more fo a threat to Stalin because he was not following Stalin's orders.  Therefore, Stalin was hostile to Tito because Tito was threatening his power.


3. Look back at the map in Source 27 on page 71. How does the geographical position of Yugoslavia help to explain why Stalin did not take any direct action (such as sending in troops) against Tito?     
 Stalin did not take any direct action, such as sending troops against Tito, because of the geographical position of Yugoslavia.  Yugoslavia is surrounded by two countries that were not part of the USSR.  As part of the Truman Doctrine, the USA might have tried to help Yugoslavia through Austria and Greece to resist Stalin.  This might have also started a war and Stalin did not want a war so he did not take direct action aginst Yugoslavia.


4. Read Source 40 (p. 77). What reasons did the Soviet Union give for cutting off West Berlin?       
  The Soviet Union cut off West Berlin.  They stated that they were not allowing traffic and barges in because of technical difficulties and they did not have enough coal to give West Berlin electricity.  thos were the reason the Soviet Union gave.


5. Why do you think the USA did not believe these were genuine reasons?           

  The USA did not believe these were genuine reasons because they knew the true plan of the Soviet Union.  The Soviet Union wanted to take over all of Europe and probably the world.  Taking Berlin by cutting off the rest of the world so that Berlin would be poor was a perfect plan for the USSR.  Communist appealed to the poor, so cutting off Berlin was taking one little bit of Europe at a time.  Also, taking Berlin was like a test to the USA.  It was seeing how much the USSR could do before the USA would start a war and is equivalent to a little child testing the rules.  The third reason the USA did not believe that the USSR gave genuine reasons is that there is a small chance that all of these technical problems would happen at the same time.  Therefore, the USA did not believe the USSR's reasons.

6. How do Sources 41–43 differ in their interpretation of the blockade?            
  Source 41, 42, and 43 differ in their interpretation of the blockade.  Source 41 reports the Berlin Blockade to be a tie.  Neither side won and the whole situation just increased the tension between the USA and USSR.  Source 42 states that the USA "won" by showing the USSR how strong they are.  Source 43 states that the USSR had nothing to do with the Berlin Blockade and the USA is full of liars who imagined it.  Those are how the Sources differ because they all blame different sides and state that different sides won.


7.  Which do you think is the most useful source for a historian studying the Berlin Blockade?       
  Out fo Sources 41, 42, and 43, the most useful source for a historian studying the Berlin Blockade is Source 43.  That is because this source shows the views published by the Soviet Union about the Berlin Blockade almost forty years later.  This may not be the most accurate depiction of the event, but it shows the views the USSR wished to publicly announce and how they looked back on the event after the fact.  Therefore, this is the most interesting and useful source for a historian studying attitudes towards the Berlin Blockade.



8.  Which source do you think gives the most reliable view of the blockade?      

  The most factual and reliable view fo the blockade is Source 41 because it was written by a historian who was not swayed by emotions present at the time of the blockade because it was written about thirty five years after the blockade.