p The Soviet government, considering it necessary to nip the aggression in the bud, put forward the principle of " indivisibility of peace”. It proceeded from the assumption that it was easier to prevent a fire than to put it out, or the more so when it would have engulfed many countries, if not entire continents. It was the maintenance of world peace that served best to ensure the peace of every particular country, that of the Soviet Union, among them.

p Had it proved possible to stamp out the hotbeds of war in Europe and in the Far East as soon as they had emerged, and to curb the German and Japanese aggressors, the Soviet Union would not have had to fear their attack. That would have been an optimal course of events for the USSR, and the best guarantee of its security. It would have been entirely different if the aggressors, taking advantage of the lack of co-operation between the non-aggressor nations, would have overrun them one by one, thereby building up their own forces. Such a course of events would have contradicted the vital interests of the people of all nations, including the USSR. So the principle of indivisible peace responded to the interests of all nations under a threat of attack.

p While on this subject, one cannot fail to mention that historical publications in Western countries have given much currency to the argument that the Soviet Union dreamed of a war between the two imperialist alignments.^^68^^ The earlier account of the Soviet Union’s attitude to war as well as the Soviet policy based on the principle of indivisible peace show such contentions to be utterly baseless.

Soviet diplomacy produced a series of specific proposals for strengthening peace and security.