According to Kausewitz, «war is the continuation of politics by other means», by means of armed struggle. A state’s capacity to implement its war-time policy principles and ends with military ways and means depends on correct definition of a state’s war-time policy. The World War II is replete with illustrations that inadequately, poorly formulated, permeated with reactionary ideology geopolitics had a negative bearing of achievement of specific goals by a state military machine. The author discloses contradictions between policies and strategies of the USSR’s allies in anti-Nazi coalition and anti-Japan coalition in the Pacific war. The author demonstrates how these contradictions impeded war efforts of Western allies and led Japan to military and political downfall in the world war.

Responses and comments to Gorki’s letter with the demand to knock already prepared stage play on F.M.Dostoevski's novel «Demons» off the Moscow Art Theater’s repertoire expressed the modernist attitude to infringement of personal freedom in the space of culture. Virtually everybody who responded to the situation censured Gorki for violence against freedom of creativity. However, the revolutionary young people who acted in the open discussions of Gorki’s letter, rather supported than condemned the writer. In his answer to critics Gorki himself did not admit any fault and accused his opponents of «philistinism», «cynicism» and «platitude». The article deals with the deep-seated foundations of differences in explanations of these concepts. The differences resulted from the polar perceptions of Russia’s progress and Russia’s future.

Heroism was and remains to be one of the most effective tools of Communist regime legitimization. At the same time creation of heroes was an effective tool of the Soviet elites formation. Rise of «heroic» quasi-social layer of population became the most pronounced example of social mobility in the Soviet society. The author traces genesis of this phenomenon from the cult of fallen heroes of the revolution and civil war through the «post-heroic» «New Economic Policy» period up to «the time of heroes» of the second half of the 1930s. This later period was marked with a hero’s image functionality. A particular attention is paid to the role of the «heroic» narrative.

The attempt by the new Soviet leadership in 1965 to increase all forms of censorship and other repressive measures created opposition among many intellectuals which developed into «dissident movement». To suppress this dissent the KGB started to use different repressive measures, including the pressure to emigrate, deprivation of some dissidents of Soviet citizenship with confiscation of their passports and the deportation. Zhores Medvedev, biologist, was deprived his Soviet citizenship in July 1973 while officially arranged research trip to London. In his Memoirs «Dangerous profession», extracts of which are published here, he describes some episodes of his first year as an exile and the problems of some other dissidents, in this story Mstislav Rostropovich and Alexander Solzhenitsyn forced out of the USSR in 1974.

During the World longest crisis — the Great Depression and the Second World War — in the USA one man stood nearest to the president Franklin D. Roosevelt. It was Harry L. Hopkins — trusted and loyal lieutenant of the president. From his work as a social worker in the New Deal through his most dangerous assignments during the war Hopkins demonstrated his best qualities — intellect and the art of creative diplomacy in negotiations with world leaders. By the fall of 1941 Hopkins became a key figure in US-Soviet relations. The main part of the article deals with the unknown Hopkins' letter to Stalin written by the special presidential envoy after his Moscow visit in July 1941.

This article analyzes the documents of the International Economic Conference held in Moscow in April 1952. The authors clarify and enhance the common point of view on the formation of foreign policy doctrine of late Stalinism. In addition, the published documents are a clear illustration of pragmatic solutions of current problems of internal and foreign policy of the Soviet government. The reader gets a rare opportunity to «see» the events in a historical context by the «eyes» of their members, which is especially relevant in the context of modernity.

The author shares with impressions he gained during his recent visit to the capital of Germany (the visit coincided with the 70-th jubilee of the Great Victory. The opinion of the expert on German affairs, author of numerous studies in the 20th century German history, a person who from «within» observed how the Federal Republic of Germany really expanded at the expense of the German Democratic Republic is of interest because a picture that is carefully produced by media and politicians who care of anything but firm and safe peace in Europe does not disturb the author’s judgment. For a lot in the contemporary world still depends on what Germans think and do. The author comes to the conclusions providing a hope that peacefulness and readiness to constructive cooperation (both traits can be regarded as the GDR’s political testament) will prevail in the final resort.