Undersecretary of State Stuart Eizenstat criticized Poland`s accession to NATO last month by addressing the « betrayal » of Western allies at the 1945 Yalta Conference. Thus, in this Crimean city, half a century ago, reflections are still discussed – as irrationally as possible. Yalta`s statements on liberated Europe and Poland were all that the most fervent democrat would have liked: guarantees of free and multi-party elections, secret votes and the benefits of Western freedom standards. Apart from these two statements, Yalta has no other on Eastern Europe. Historian Ted Morgan wrote: « Yalta was a defeat for the Soviets, and they considered it that way. What they won at the negotiating table was already possessed by their armies. If Yalta was out of stock, why did [Stalin] violate the agreement for so long? The problem with Yalta was not that it was a bad deal, but that Stalin didn`t know it. This does not deny treason, but justifies it for reasons of realpolitik and conceals the importance of the American head of state in Yalta. President Roosevelt was a sick man at the Conference of the Big Three, where he was advised by a Soviet spy agent. Western treason considers that the United Kingdom, France and sometimes the United States have failed to comply with their legal, diplomatic, military and moral obligations to the Czechoslovakian and Polish countries in the early and post-World War II era. It also sometimes refers to the treatment of other Central and Eastern European countries at that time. In some cases, deliberate duplicity is argued, arguing that secret agreements or intentions were at odds with public agreements. One example is Winston Churchill`s secret agreement with the USSR that the Atlantic Charter did not apply to the Baltic States.

Faced with strategic demands to win the war, British Prime Minister Churchill and U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt had no choice but to accept the demands of their former ally, Soviet Prime Minister Joseph Stalin, at the Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam conferences, said retired American diplomat Charles G. Stefan. [4] On 16 July, New York Daily News columnist Lars-Erik Nelson wrote that Eizenstat had « repeated a 50-year right-wing defamation at a briefing the previous day by claiming that the Poles belonged to NATO because they had been betrayed by the Yalta agreements signed by Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Church with Stalinill. » On 20 July, post-columnist David Broder, who also attended the briefing, called on Eizenstat to « blame » Poland`s handover to the Soviet Union to justify NATO enlargement. Czech politicians have joined the newspapers regularly using the term Western betrayal, and it has become, with the feelings associated with it, a stereotype among Czechs. At the same time, the Czech terms mnichov (Munich), Mnichovska zrada (Munich Treason), Mnichovska (Munich`s dictated) and zrada spojencé (allied treason) were coined and have the same meaning.