Source number

Evidence for
agreement/disagreement
Reasons why the source is
reliable/unreliable
s o u r c e 3: Perhaps you think that just because we
are the allies of the English we have forgotten who they
are and who Churchill is. Theres nothing they like
better than to trick their allies. During the first world
war they constantly tricked the Russians and the French.
And Churchill? Churchill is the kind of man who will
pick your pocket of a kopeck [a kopeck is a low value
soviet coin.] and Roosevelt? Roosevelt is not like that.
He dips in his hand only for bigger coins. But
Churchill? He will do it for a kopeck.
Disagreement Rather than acknowledging his partners
at Yalta to be trustworthy, Stalin only considers both
America and Britains past negative encounters with the
USSR. Stalin portrays them to be weak and desperate in
the game of foolery, showing obvious incompatibility
between the leaders of Yalta.
Stalin speaking to a fellow Communist, Milovan Djilas,
in 1945. Djilas was a supporter of Stalin.
Speaking to his own supporter, Stalin wouldnt lie. He
would convey his most honest opinions on the matter.
Thus, I believe that this source is reliable in conveying
Stalins opinion on Yalta.
( also occurs during the time of the actual conference,
making it seem highly accurate )
s o u r c e 4: In the hallway [at Yalta] we stopped
before a map of the world on which the Soviet Union
was colored in red. Stalin waved his hand over the
Soviet Union and exclaimed, They [Roosevelt and
Churchill] will never accept the idea that so great a
space should be red, never, never!
Disagreement Stalin seems to be under the strong
impression that both of his partners at Yalta would never
truly accept the Soviet Union as it was. This shows
obvious mistrust between the leaders, who misjudge
intentions of each other.
Milovan Djilas writing about Yalta in 1948.
Speaking as supporter of Stalin, Djilas would be
considered biased. However, in this particular source,
Djilas speaks as though he shares facts instead of
opinions. Thus, I believe that this source is reliable in
conveying Stalins opinion on Yalta.
( also occurs during the time of the actual conference,
making it seem highly accurate )
s o u r c e 5: Once, Churchill asked Stalin to send him
the music of the new Soviet Russian anthem so that it
could be broadcast before the summary of the news from
the Soviet German front. Stalin sent the words [as well]
and expressed the hope that Churchill would set about
learning the new tune and whistling it to members of the
Conservative Party. While Stalin behaved with relative
discretion with Roosevelt, he continually teased
Churchill throughout the war.
Disagreement Stalin is portrayed here to have a
mocking attitude towards Churchill. Despite Churchills
desire to play the new Soviet Russian anthem, Stalin
daringly challenges Churchill to learn it himself, teasing
him. This shows the complicated relationships between
the partners of Yalta and how some could not get along.
Written by Soviet historian Sergei Kudryashov after the
war.
Speaking as a Soviet historian, Kudryashov would be
considered biased. However, in this particular source,
Kudryashov speaks as though he shares facts instead of
opinions. Thus, I believe that this source is reliable.
( also occurs during the time of the actual conference,
making it seem highly accurate )
s o u r c e 6: The Soviet Union has become a danger to
the free world. A new front must be created against her
onward sweep. This front should be as far east as
possible. A settlement must be reached on all major
issues between West and East in Europe before the
armies of democracy melt.


Disagreement Churchill is expressing genuine concern
on the spread of communism and the threat that it poses
to the democratic government system of Europe. He
calls the USSR a danger, showing conflict as leaders
did not trust their partners at the conference.
Churchill writing to Roosevelt shortly after the Yalta
Conference.
As it involves two of the major figures within the
conference, it can be assumed that this source would be
reliable in sharing both Britain and the USAs views on
Yalta, however biased.
( also occurs during the time of the actual conference,
making it seem highly accurate )
s o u r c e 7:









Disagreement Churchills intentions are displayed here
as only heroically acting for his country. It depicts him
badly as a person, showing the failure of the partnership
involved with the pact at Yalta.
A Soviet cartoon. Churchill is shown with two flags, the
first proclaiming that Anglo-Saxons must rule the
world and the other threatening an iron curtain.
Published as a Soviet cartoon, it can be inferred that this
source would be biased. Obviously only sharing the
opinionated Soviet view on the matter, I believe that this
source is unreliable in showing viewers a balance in the
situation.
s o u r c e 8: [At Yalta] Churchill feared that Roosevelt
was too pro-Russian. He pressed for a French zone to be
added to the other three to add another anti-Russian
voice to the armies of occupation.
Disagreement Churchill is displayed here to have
insecurity surrounding Roosevelts position at Yalta. He
fears that Roosevelt will stand alongside Stalin and so
he demanded that a French representative would join the
conference. Churchill was confident in the fact that
Frances view would only add to the anti-Russian
voice. This shows one of the major leaders at Yalta and
their failure to trust their allies.
Written by Christopher Culpin in a school textbook, The
Modern World, 1984.
As a school textbook extract, this source would be
considered unbiased and fairly accurate to a satisfactory
level.
( also written much later to the time of the actual
conference, making it seem highly accurate with
hindsight )
s o u r c e 9: One could see that Churchill had left a
deep impression on the Soviet leaders as a farsighted
and dangerous statesman although they did not like
him.
Disagreement Churchill is portrayed as an ignorant
leader, offending many Soviet leaders. This source is
blunt in stating exactly how the USSR did not like
Churchill and his actions, showing a conflict to the
agreement in Yalta as countries would not be able to
coexist peacefully.
Milovan Djilas comments, in 1948, on Stalins
assessment of Churchill.
Speaking as supporter of Stalin, Djilas would be
considered biased, seeing things in only the perspective
of Stalin.
( also occurs shortly after the time of the actual
conference, making it seem highly accurate )
s o u r c e 1 0: [In May 1945] Churchill ordered
Montgomery to keep the German arms intact, in case
they had to be used against the Russians.
Disagreement Churchill is displayed here to have
insecurity surrounding Russia. He does not trust the
country enough to acquire help from the German army
as backup against them. This shows that the main
partnerships at Yalta worked with no trust for one
another whatsoever.
Written by historian Hugh Higgins in The Cold War,
1974
As a historic book, this source would be considered
unbiased and fairly accurate to a satisfactory level.
( also written much later to the time of the actual
conference, making it seem highly accurate with
hindsight )
s o u r c e 1 1: One night Stalin stung Churchill when
proposing a toast by reminding Churchill of his failures
at Gallipoli in the First World War. Another night
Churchill declared (whilst slightly drunk) that he
deserved a medal for teaching the Soviet army to fight
so well through the intervention at Archangel.
Disagreement Painful failures of both the USSR and
Britain are brought up against one another. This shares a
mocking side to the leaders who poke at the wound,
showing that as allies from Yalta, leaders do a poor job
of supporting one another, bringing each other down
instead.
The Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov writing about
Yalta. In 1915 Churchill had been responsible for a
failed attack at Gallipoli. In 1918 Churchill had
supported the British decision to send troops to
Archangel to help in the fight against the Communists in
the Russian Civil War.
As it was written by the Soviet Foreign Minister, this
source would be considered biased towards Russias
views on the matter. However, in this particular source,
it is written as if to only share facts instead of opinions.