Joseph Stalin

National interest illumined Russian actions and strongly influenced Churchill’s statements. In the same sense, we may unravel his seeming contradictory assessments of Russia by recognizing that he perceived the world through British national interests. It is also important to recognize his consistent attitude toward the Russian people. Towards them, Churchill frequently expressed compassion, however cautious or even hostile he might be toward Russian policies and leaders.

Russia was born in Kiev in the first millennium, became a world power under Peter the Great in 1721. As a Soviet quasi-state, Ukraine became a member of the United Nations in 1945, separate from but always voting with the USSR. Churchill despised Soviet ideology, but departing from his earlier views he did not consider the USSR illegitimate. Its rule extended over a vast territory, and with Europe shattered, the best option was diplomacy combined with deterrence.

The 1946 Churchill-Stalin exchange was remarkably similar to Churchill’s with Hitler eight years earlier: “I am surprised that the head of a great State should set himself to attack British members of Parliament who hold no official position and who are not even the leaders of parties.” Martin Gilbert’s official biography informs our knowledge Churchill’s consistency.

When Churchill took a harder line with Stalin at Yalta, he was consistent with his policy always to oppose the greater enemy.

Despite inadequate sourcework, Wynn takes a human view of Churchill, and so writes a book examining the “flawed decisions” of the “Greatest Briton.”

During the war Churchill told a general: “Improvise and dare…He improvise and dore.” Leebaert sees America’s walk to global leadership in much the same way.

The Soviets contributed mightily to victory, but their success was owed to Churchill and Roosevelt, who provided crucial aid and kept Japan occupied.

In wartime, Eisenhower related to Churchill as junior to senior. As President, the relationship vastly changed, but ties of sentiment were still there.

“Only Churchill carries that absolutely required criterion: indispensability,” wrote Dr. Krauthammer. “Without Churchill the world today would be unrecognizable.”

The director of the Churchill Archives Center examines Churchill’s decision-making methods on challenges and problems of the Second World War.

Read Larry P. Arnn's analysis of Churchill's fight against socialism on the domestic front in Great Britain, as excerpted from his book "Churchill's Trial".

Speaking of Britain and its Empire in 1941, Winston Churchill said: “We have not journeyed all this way across the centuries, across the oceans, across the mountains, across the prairies, because we are made of sugar candy.”1 A few weeks earlier he had advised the boys at Harrow School: “Never give in—never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”2 The image he conveyed is one of hardiness and personal toughness, and it galvanized his countrymen. Yet we rarely give thought to where he found the hardiness and resilience he conveyed.