Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts

49-54

Authors: Vladislav A. Parkhomenko

The article analyzes the formation of “the image of the enemy” in the Russian society in 1914–1916 on the basis of periodical and non-periodical publications. The author focuses on the relationship of information policy and its part in the military-political events in the world. It displays the impact of media on mass consciousness. It is also noted that the formation of the image of the enemy was productive in the army and among the population, but only during the early years of the war. In addition to newspapers and illustrated periodicals (“Lyetopis’ voyny”, “Velikaya voyna v obrazakh i kartinkhakh”, “Ogonyok”, “Iskry”, “Neva”), brochures and books, published for “propagandizing” the reader during the Great War were also used as materials for the article.

65-71

Authors: Dmitry V. Liventsev

The article deals with the organization of the military propaganda in the Baltic fleet during the Soviet-Finnish war 1939–1940. The author analyzed the propaganda spread in the Navy along with the objective difficulties related to the clarification of the goals and objectives of the war with Finland. The author of the article used materials from the funds of the Russian State Archive of the Navy (RSA Navy), the city of St. Petersburg. Publications and rare editions of the political department of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet were used. In this work, traditional and general scientific methods were used with the historical-situational method in respect to the Red Banner Baltic Fleet and its political management. In conclusion, the author notes the reasons for the effectiveness of military propaganda among officers and sailors of the Baltic fleet. At the same time little-known questions of the Soviet – Finnish war of 1939–1940 are investigated.

81-93

Authors: Michal Šmigel

The development of a solution to the question of Subcarpathian Ruthenia in 1944–1945 which ultimately led to the withdrawal of this territory from the Soviet Union (initially called the Transcarpathian Ukraine), had a certain significance in the territory of Slovakia too. In the broader meaning, it had affected the situation around the so-called Ukrainian question in Slovakia. It emerged through the so-called Movement for annexation of northeastern Slovakia to Transcarpathian Ukraine (Soviet Ukraine) and the establishment of the Ukrainian National Council of Prjaševščina (at the turn of 1944–1945 or at the beginning of 1945), evidently being carried out with the support of the Communist authorities in Transcarpathia, the Red Army headquarters and Soviet State Security Departments. The events in Transcarpathia have obviously influenced developments in northeastern Slovakia and had a major impact on the political activation of some local representatives of the Ukrainian population (as it was in the case in the Marmaros-Sighet region of Romania) who, at the time of the liberation of Eastern Slovakia, had not any clear idea of the further orientation. At the beginning of their activities, they attempted to imitate the variant of the Transcarpathian sovietisation and were supported by Soviet military and security structures. Clearly, this was a local initiative developed and coordinated by Uzhhorod which the Soviet leadership in Moscow had tolerated for some time (as a means of pressure on the Czechoslovak government and president Beneš to give up Subcarpathian Rutheniato the Soviet Union as soon as possible) and then halted regarding the willingness of Czechoslovak government officials not to complicate relations with Kremlin and carry out the handover of Subcarpathian Ruthenia to the USSR in 1945.