cold war revision guide part ii

8/10/2019 Cold War Revision Guide Part II

1/21

COLD WAR REVISION GUIDE PART I

Summarized by: __________________________________________

I. Origins of the Cold War

What role(s) did ideological differences play in the origins of the Cold War?

The Western world wanted to retain liberty and liberalism through capitalism

while Stalin wanted to spread communist. He used it to permeate EasternEurope and create a bloc of countries under his control. The spread ofcommunism obviously made the Western leaders very uncomfortable. Trumanbased his entire strategy of containment on George Kennans analysis ofcommunism and its leaders in the USSR, perhaps inferring that he judgedideology to be the most prevalent problem in the USSR and that his oppositionwas towards communism and not the Russians himself: Kennan recognised theRussian people as being by and large, friendly to outside world, eager for

experience of it, he implies the entire problem is the ideology, and the leaderswho believe in it. The American hostility to communism (and Soviet distrust of

capitalism) therefore played a huge role in the shaping of the Cold War as it wasto become.

Moreover, Winston Churchill could be said to have helped cause the Cold Warbecause of his ideological differences with Stalin. His 1946 Iron Curtain speechcertainly caused tension: it unveiled to the world Stalins increasing Soviet

sphere and increasing measure of control from Moscow, strongly showing his

disapproval of Stalins swooping over EasternEurope and inferring his stronglyanti-communist stance. However, this speech was given in 1946, and Churchillwas no longer the Prime Minister; that role had passed to Clement Attlee,inferring that he felt he was only able to make such a blunt statement of his

views once he was out of power. Conversely, when he was in high office,Churchill was able to work well with Stalin he called him Uncle Joe, inferringthey were more than just cordial allies working purely against Stalin. In fact, theIron Curtain speech could be seen as hypocritical as Churchill made anagreement with Stalin, which allowed him to have 75% of influence in Bulgariaand 90% in Romania, two of the places he referenced in the speech. Conversely,it could be construed that Churchill knew he had to work with Stalin the best hecould, but nonetheless did not share his ideas. While their relationship duringthe war could have been seen as constructive, ultimately Churchills anti-communist stance caused tension, inferring that ideological differences did have

more input into the origins of the Cold War.


2/21

Also, the core ideologies of the Western and Eastern powers did help form thebase of the Cold War. National priorities such as the need for a free market tosell goodsare often dictated by the ideology, which the country supports.However, this seems to be more relevant to the USA than the USSR; it has beensuggested that the USSR lost its priority to spread international communism in

1921, as civil war loomed. Eastern Europe seemed to be affected more by Stalinsneed to protect and build up his country than any real desire to spreadcommunism; the ideology seemed to be a means to an end, rather than theintegral purpose of creating the Eastern bloc.

What role(s) did mutual suspicion and fear play in the origins of the Cold War?

The mutual suspicion, fear, and outright hostility between the United States andthe Soviet Union grew out of ideological differences and concrete actionsstretching back to World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Thesedifferences were briefly set aside for a portion of World War II. Following theNazi invasion of Russia in June 1941, Washington and Moscow entered into whathas been called a strange alliance. This anti-German union of convenience andnecessity temporarily muted the tensions between the two countries. Butdisagreement over such issues as the timing of the second front and antagonisticvisions of postwar Europe pushed the United States and the Soviet Union into aCold War within months of the end of World War II.

Look at the causes/ roots of the Cold WarKennanPolicy of Containment; fear of the spreading of Communism.Communism is viewed as a danger and aggressive, however communistcountries view capitalism as such. This idea of containment led to theinvolvement of the US in the Vietnam War.

Nuclear weapons changed how international relations were conducted. Thenature of security was psychological as the US and the Soviet Union were unsureand acted on what they assumed to happen. For example, the creation of theatomic bomb by the US, created fear in the Soviet Union because they wereunsure if it would be used against them; they felt insecure so they sent spies tosee how the atomic bomb was made s they could make their own and potentiallyfeel safer or have a way to strike back if attacked.

The Soviet Union under Stalin was paranoidRussia was invaded three times atthe beginning of the twentieth century in 1914, 1918 and 1941. Stalin hadalways felt that the western leaders wanted to see communism crushed. Duringthe Russian Civil War in 1918, the Western power which included Britain, Franceand US had fought on the side of the hwites against the communist government.

The US was driven in large part by the fear of another depression.


3/21

How did the West and the USSR shift from being wartime allies to post-warenemies?The reason why the USA and UK fought alongside the USSR during the SecondWorld War was their common will to defeat Nazi Germany. This was also themotivation behind Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchills cooperationduring the Yalta

conference of February 1945, as the war against Germany, although in its finalstages, was still raging. This changed at the Potsdam conference of July, by whichtime Germany had already surrendered; the common enemy was no longer abinding force, the old allies were left to fall apart. This disintegration continuedfrom 1945 until its climax at the Berlin Blockade of 1948.

The orthodox reason for the change from allies to enemies, incessantlycampaigned, is that, as the Wehrmacht retreated between the Yalta conference inFebruary and the Potsdam conference in July 1945, the Red Army remainedmobilised. Stalin, apparently defying decisions made at Yalta, did not liberate the

countries in Eastern Europe, but instead occupied them with his troops, much tothe vexation of the Western allies. It is customarily argued that it becameestablished Soviet policy to make them voluntary satellite state throughinfiltration and subversion.

II. Nature of the Cold War

How did ideological opposition play out in the policy decisions and actions of thetwo sides in the Cold War?

One area upon which the Allies could not agree, however, was Poland a stormypoint in national interests which may have contributed towards the onset of ColdWar. The British had invested their interests in Polands freedom, as they hadgone into the war to fight for its liberty from Germany, and the Polishgovernment in exile was stationed in London. Conversely, Stalin had set up aCommittee for National Liberation for the Polish in Moscow, framing a wish forcommunism as coming from the Polish people, as well as creating a new puppetgovernment in Lublin, in the south east of the country. Poland was of significantimportance to Stalin as the Polish corridor had been used to attack Russia twicein the previous thirty years; by having the country under his control, he couldstop armies from making their way to the actual border of the USSR andattacking Moscow or Stalingrad, the latter of which suffered heavily from attackin the Second World War.

Stalins biggest national priority was to protect the USSR from attack, and thebuffer zone he intended to create (including Poland) was an important part ofthis plan. Though, from a Western point of view, this could be seen to promotethe spread of communism, but Stalins ideas did not seem to be so insidious; hisprimary aim seems to be more related to protecting his country than spreadinghis communist ideals. For instance, in Hungary, Stalin allowed a democratically

elected government to stay in place in 1945, rather than using his influence andthe three important positions that communists had taken in order to overthrow


4/21

the government with a communist regime. Stalin was apparently aware thatthough he required communist influence to keep his country safe, he could notafford to distance himself from the West completely. It may have simply been acase of Stalin trying to recoup the territory the USSR lost to Germany in both thetreaty of Brest-Litovsk and the Nazi-Soviet Pact, and parts of the old empire that

Russia had once had for instance, Finland. As Britain at the time still had mostof its empire intact (India, the jewel in the British Empires crown, gained full

independence a year later in 1947), Stalin could also be seen to regaining whatwas his previously.

Americas priority was not territorial; instead, it intended to help Europe rebuild

itself. While this in itself seems innocent enough, its underlying motivespotentially caused tensions which could have sparked the Cold War. Through aidsupplied by the Marshall Plan, America aided Western nations which hadpreviously been destroyed by the war to build their economies back up. Italy, for

instance, took Marshall Aid and consequently moved to a democratic system ofgovernance and a capitalist market. The USA had not suffered the damage to itsindustrial districts that the Europeans had suffered during bombing; it thereforehad goods to export, and needed a large, free market in which to sell those. Thiswhich could only be gained through the spread of capitalism or DollarImperialism, as it was dubbed. To a communist, this could be seen as an indirectattack on their ideology, and that this spreading of capitalism, though itpromised freedom and liberty, could be inferred to make nations dependant onAmerican goods and loans until their own economies recovered.

How did the superpowers delineate and interact with their spheres of influence?

What role(s) did alliances and diplomacy play in the Cold War?

While the war with Germany continued, the wartime allies (USA, USSR andBritain) met to discuss the post-war future of Europe. The most significantmeetings between the allied leaders were at Yalta in February 1945 andPotsdam in July 1945.

The Yalta Conference

Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill agreed that Germany be divided into four zonesto be occupied by USA, USSR, Britain and France. It was also recognised thatStalin was to have influence over Eastern Europe, but that free elections be heldin them to decide who governed them. The biggest problem was Poland. Stalinhad liberated Poland and a communist government had been established. Stalininsisted that a friendly government be established there to protect the USSR

from Germany. Stalin refused to allow democratic elections in Poland.

The Big Three at Yalta were Winston Churchill, President Roosevelt and JosephStalin

The Potsdam Conference


5/21

By the time the allies met again, the situation had changed considerably.Germany had been defeated, Roosevelt had died and had been replaced byTruman and Clement Attlee had defeated Churchill. The allies agreed to divideGermany into zones and to claim reparations for war losses.

However, the USA began to realise that it did not want a weakened Germany inCentral Europe, a perfect breeding ground for communism. Truman wanted torebuild Germany, while Stalin wanted to weaken it further by taking equipmentand materials as reparations. The pattern for future conflict between the USAand the USSR had begun

I. Development and impact of the Cold War (a)

How and why did the Cold War spread from its European origins, and brieflysummarize the major battlefields/areas of contention outside Europe.

The strategy was supported by America's allies in NATObut opposed by agrowing youth movement hostile to what was seen as a new form of imperialism,and anxious about the growing threat of nuclear war. The first major test forcontainment came in 1959 when Fidel Castro led a Communist-inspired revolt inCuba. The new revolutionary regime was supported by the Soviet Union. When itbecame clear in 1962 that Castro was being supplied with Soviet Union missiles,

Washington issued an ultimatum to the Soviet Union to remove them, andordered a naval blockade of Cuba.

The confrontation was one of the most dramatic episodes of the postwar period.At the final moment, Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev ordered SovietUnion vessels bound for Cuba to turn back. U.S. president John F. Kennedy wassaved from having to make a final decision for military action. A year later,Kennedy was assassinated; in 1964 Khrushchev was removed from office by hisparty colleagues.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the Cold War came to direct conflict

between the two superpowers. The conflict was played out thereafter by proxy:one side or the other lending support to third-party states, engaging in espionageand covert operations, and arming and funding guerrilla movements andinsurgencies. In 1964 the United States, led by President Lyndon Johnson, madethe decision to commit troops and aircraft to the civil war in South Vietnam, andfor 10 years the U.S. fought to contain the spread of communism in SoutheastAsia. North Vietnam was supported by the Soviet Union. In 1975, followingprolonged antiwar protests in the United States and Europe, the last Americanforces were withdrawn.

Four years later, the Soviet Union sent troops to fight in Afghanistan in supportof the Communist regime, an intervention that lasted 10 years and cost the lives


6/21

of thousands of Soviet Union soldiers. The United States provided aid and armsfor the anti-Communist guerrilla movement. In 1989 the Soviet Union withdrewits forces. Both the Vietnam and Afghan wars were the longest periods of activefighting for both states since World War II. Both involved high casualties,considerable cost, and eventual defeat. Cold War by proxy proved deeplydamaging to both of the superpowers that fought it.

I. Development and impact of the Cold War (b)

What was containment, and what were key examples of its success and/orfailure?

The United Stateswas a phenomenal success at containing communismafter1945, as long as one considers success as not falling to communism itself. Imaintain, however, that the measure of success we should expect is thequarantine of communism to its component initial member, theSoviet Union.But in the years after World War IIto the age of the Nixonpresidency, the USfailed to stop the expansion of communism to any efficiency. The whole ofEastern Europe fell to communism. The most populous nation on Earth, China,also went communist indirectly taking with it N. Korea and Vietnam, and makingthe countries of Cambodiaand Laosquasi-communist. The United States evengained a communist satellite 90 miles out of its boundaries, Cuba. It is clear thatAmerican foreign policy with its banner of containment was a miserable failure.

Soviet aggression in Greece and Turkeywas the first major event that wouldforce America to react to Soviet activity. In 1947, Truman met this aggressionwith the Truman Doctrine. The Truman Doctrine, delivered to a joint session ofCongress, was basically an open pact to any group willing to stand againstcommunism, guaranteeing them military and financial aid. This was thebeginning of American efforts at containment, a concept dreamed up by StateDept. member George Frost Kennan. This is also the beginning of anembarrassing an unprecedented series of foreign policy blunders on the part ofthe United States. The Truman Doctrine would later be used to justify shadyactions in Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba.

American containment was backed up by earlier efforts to consolidate theWestern democratic powers against the spread of Red. The United Nationswasthe first materialization of this in 1945. The second, and perhaps most dramatic,was the call to arms by Britains moral saint,Winston Churchill. He gave a speechin 1946 encouraging active endeavors to curb communism, and avoid a thirdworld war. He spoke of an Iron Curtain, the dangerous separation of East andWest Europe where no one could see in or out. This mentality contributedgreatly to the paranoia of the Cold War. The United States also promoted andjoined NATO; a big step toward deterring communist expansion came in 1949.The North Atlantic Treaty Organizatio, as it stood for, was comprised of the

major W. European powers and the United States. The treaty provided forcollective defense of the member nations, and considered an attack against one


7/21

an attack against all. This also provided a presidential loophole for militaryintervention by America in any foreign struggle without Congress declaring war(i.e. Korea,Vietnam, Bay of Pigs). Unfortunately, this backfired, and instead ofdeterring communist expansion, forced a paranoid Soviet Union to flex itsmuscles. In 1955, to counter the NATO buildup, the USSR formed an equally

conglomerate alliance with Eastern European nations. The Warsaw Pact, as itwas known, shrouded virtually all of Eastern Europe in the IronCurtain. Poland, Bulgaria, E. Germany, Romania, and many others were now nomore than puppet nations held by the Grand Puppeteer, Russia. In one fell swoopthe Soviet Union gained almost as much land as Napoleonor Hitler; but without awar. Americas idea of a united effort at the containment of Communism hadboomeranged into a united expansion of communism.

The end of World War II brought the redrawing of boundaries all over theworld. Korea, conquered by Japan during the war, was divided at the 38thparallelthen given to the USSRin the north and the US in the south. The Soviets pulled

out of N. Korea in 1950, leaving a communist regime behind. That regime, fundedand equipped by The Peoples Republic of China, invaded S. Korea. The UnitedNations (led, of course, by the United States) raised an army to restore peace andexpel the aggressors. The conflict lasted three years and victory changed hands

twice before the bloodied United States established a cease-fire zone on thefamiliar 38thparallel. Some might say that communism in this case wassuccessfully contained, however, the loss of 53,000 American lives in a fruitlessattempt to topple a regime is hardly a victory.

A similar yet more gruesome failure of the United States would materialize inVietnam. Vietnam declared independence from France in 1945, which the French

did not recognize. A war broke and after 8 years of fighting the decision came in1954 to split the country in two, North Vietnam being Communist and SouthVietnam led by the Vietnamese who supported the French. Diem, the SouthVietnamese leader was assassinated in 1963, causing the U.S. to send overAmerican troops to try to support the non-Communist regime in the South, inaccordance with the Truman Doctrine. The consequent struggle would prove tobe the most agonizing and long defeat of the American military in history.Fighting a traditional war in a guerrilla setting and the insistence that we couldwin the war without popular support of the South Vietnamese were two keyelements of our failure. The United States suffered 68,000 dead along with400,000 S. Vietnamese allies. It was 1973 when we first started to withdraw ourtroops, and in 1976, all of Vietnam came under rule by the Communist North.Later, Vietnam would occupy Laosand Cambodiain part of an Asian Soviet bloc.

The expansion of communism to the chagrin of the United States was not over,even after the Korean Conflict and the establishment of the Warsaw Pact. In1959, the government of Cuba fell to the charismatic Fidel Castroand his regime.The establishment of communism less than 100 miles outside of the UnitedStates was achieved by a rag-tag band of guerrilla warriors. The Americanmachine of democracy was unwilling or unprepared to stop this, either for fearof judgment from the international community or of the shortsightedness causedby a general distaste for Cubas previousBatistagovernment. This would latercome back to haunt them, in both the Bay of Pigsfiasco and the Cuban MissileCrisis.


8/21

The United States government, realizing the problem Castros Cuba could be,planned a literal exertion of the Truman Doctrine. The Bay of Pigs was initiatedand organized by the late Eisenhower administration. WhenJFKcame intooffice, the plan seemed rather an attractive display of power to the newadministration. Although the plans themselves were not fully organized and the

timeframe was horrible, JFK through the CIAordered the execution of theoperation. On Apr. 17, 1961, an armed force of about 1,500 Cuban exiles landedin the Bay of Pigs. The plan backfired as the exiles were ambushed and gunneddown mercilessly; American air support never arrived. Containment was dashedonce again.

A year later, another serious event of the cold war broke out, again in communistCuba. The Soviet Union had made a deal with Fidel Castro to place nuclearweapons on the island of Cuba. These missiles gave the Soviet Union the chanceto hit American targets without an air offensive. The range of these missiles was3,000 miles, enough to demolish all the eastern seaboard of the US, Washington

DC, Dallas, Miami, and Houston. Only after a U2 flight over the island capturedthe Soviets in the midst of building silos was the United States aware of theseproceedings. On October 22, JFK announced a quarantine of Cuba, and said thatany further attempts to arms Cuba would be act of war requiring full relatliatorystrike of the US nuclear arsenal. On October 28, Soviet Dictator, Khrushchevbacked down from the crisis and removed silos from Cuba. Later revaltion

reveals that Khrushchev didnt so much back down as he had made a deal. TheUnited States secretly agreed to take out similarly installed Jupiter missiles fromTurkey for the exchanged removal of Cuban silos. The Cuban missile crisis was apropaganda victory for the Unites States and an undisclosed blow tocontainment.

Some may contend that since the Soviet Union ultimately fell, the policy ofcontainment was successful. This is an overly generous statement. The SovietUnion fell under its own weight; itsrobust military expenditures, and the cost ofadministering to such a large country could not be sustained, and the Union waslost in bankruptcy. Even though 1989 marked the end of the Cold War, the SovietUnion is still not completely dead. Russian PresidentPutinhas strong socialistleanings and, today, most eastern European countries,(Albania,Romania, Hungary, Germany, and others) have active and moderatelystrong socialist/communist parties. As another symbol of the United Statesfailures to contain communism, nations aside from those under the Soviet blocremain to this day. Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Cuba, and China(1.3 billion RedChinesestrong) are still completely Communist nations. Not only was Americancontainment in the height of the Cold Wara failure, but its failures can be seen tothis day.


9/21

What was brinkmanship, and what were key examples of its success and/orfailure?

Brinkmanshipthe willingness to go to the brink of war to force the other sideto back downand argued that it was too dangerous. During several crises,

however, President Eisenhower felt compelled to threaten nuclear war.

During his campaign for the presidency, Eisenhower had said, I shall go to

Korea, promising to end the costly and increasingly unpopular war. OnDecember 4, 1952, he kept his promise. Bundled against the freezing Koreanwinter, the president-elect talked with frontline commanders and their troops.Eisenhower became convinced that the ongoing battle was costing too manylives and bringing too few victories. He was determined to bring the war to anend. The president then quietly let the Chinese know that the United States mightcontinue the Korean War under circumstances of our own choosinga hint ata nuclear attack.

The threat to go to the brink of nuclear war seemed to work. In July 1953negotiators signed an armistice. The battle line between the two sides in Korea,which was very near the prewar boundary, became the border between NorthKorea and South Korea. A demilitarized zone separatedthem. American troopsare still based in Korea, helping to defend South Koreas border.

Shortly after the Korean War ended, a new crisis erupted in Asia. AlthoughCommunists has taken power in mainland China, the nationalists still controlledTaiwan and several small islands along Chinas coast. In thefall of 1954 China

threatened to seize two of the islands. Eisenhower saw Taiwan as part of theanti-communist barrier in Asia that needed to be protected at all costs. WhenChina began shelling the islands and announced that Taiwan would be liberated,Eisenhower asked Congress authorize the use of force to defend Taiwan. He thenwarned the Chinese that any attack on Taiwan would be resisted by US navalforces stationed nearby and hinted that they would use nuclear weapons to stopan invasion. Soon afterward, China backed down.

The following year, a serious crisis erupted in the Middle East. Eisenhowers

goals in that region was to prevent Arab nations from aligning with the SovietUnion. To build support among Arabs, Secretary of State Dulles offered to helpEgypt finance the construction of a dam on the Nile Rive. The deal ran intotrouble in Congress, however, because Egypt had bought weapons fromCommunist Czechoslovakia. Dulles was forced to withdraw the offer. A weeklater, Egyptian troops seized control of the Suez Canal from the Anglo-frenchcompany that had controlled it. The Egyptians intended to use the canals profits

to pay for the dam. The British and French responded quickly to the Suez Crisis.In October 1956, British and French trops invaded Egypt. Eisenhower wasfurious with Britain and France. The situation became even more dangerouswhen the Soviet Union threatened rocket attacks on Britain and France andoffered to send troops to help Egypt. Eisenhower immediately put US nuclear

forces on alert, noting, If those fellows start something, we may have to hitthemand if necessary, with everything in the bucket. Under strong pressure


10/21

from the US, the British and French called of their invasion. The Soviet Union hadwon a major diplomatic victory, however, by supporting Egypt. Soon afterward,other Arab nations began accepting Soviet aid as well.

What was peaceful coexistence, and what were key examples of its successand/or failure?

What was detente, and what were key examples of its success and/or failure?

Dtente began because of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the need for improvedrelationships between China, the USA, and the USSR and failed because of thefailure of foreign policies.

Cuban Missile Crisis

TOPIC SENTENCE: The Cuban Missile crisis was the crisis-point of the Cold War.It was the straw that would have broken the camels back. This was what

officially started dtente.

All the heightened tension, communist (Castros) Cuba,and failure byKennedy to invade Cuba attributed to starting the Cuban Missile Crisis

Cuban Missile Crisis was the American spy plane that was shot down

America began its naval blockade that kept USSR ships with missiles fromcoming in

USSR continued to build its military bases Attack seemed inevitable from either side Discussions began between Khruschev and Kennedy that still threatened

to bring the US and USSR to a nuclear war Each side trying to get the other to dismantle and/or remove their

nuclear weapons Both sides eventually too frightened and crisis finished Managed to come up with the First Arms Limitation Treaty of 1963

THUS, DTENTE BEGAN

CHINA

TOPIC SENTENCE: Dtente began because of Chinas foreign fears and the

ensuing small amount of nuclear weapons versus the USA.

Fearful of her isolation in the world. Fearful of what USA had done in Vietnam. China was also worried by her worsening relations with USSR.

Chinas stockpile of nuclear weapons was a lot smaller than that of USA.


11/21

USA

TOPIC SENTENCE: Dtente began because the USA realized that there werebetter ways of approaching containment that would be more beneficial to theUSA.

Realized that there were better ways of containing communism than theways that she done in previous years.

Also aware of the massive cost of weapons production and maintaining ahuge armed force.

A peaceful relationship with the USSR would be very beneficial to USAespecially after the cost of the Vietnam War

USSR

TOPIC SENTENCE: Dtente began because USSR wanted to improve livingstandards in USSR and it knew of Chinas growing relationship with the USA

USSR was spending a huge amount on weapons at the expense of basichousehold goods.

Living standards were poor USSR was also aware that her relationship with China was far from good

while USA was trying to improve hers with China.

USA USSR failures (Carter era)

TOPIC SENTENCE: Failure of the US foreign policydue to events of Vietnamwar and Watergate scandal, and Carter HUGELY involved in human rights.Also the power struggle in USSR due to Brezhnevs illness and their subsequent

takeovers added to US suspicion. It was the beginning of a widening gap.

Vietnam war US foreign policy shaky after WaterGate Scandal Carter preoccupied with human rights, made USSR impatient SALT 2.

Counter argument: Carter-Brezhnev summit in Vienna in 1979agreed to further limit stockpiles of weapon

Counter counter argument: The US senate refused to ratify thetreaty.Further evidence of failure of foreign policy

Communist invasions in Nicaragua in 1979 and Soviet invasion ofAfghanistanBrezhnev was ill and aging and a power struggle wastaking place behind the scenes. The USSR were concerned about Islamicextremism in the ME hence their actions in Afghanistan.ADDED TOSUSPICION OF US because of PERCEIVED TENSIONS

USA USSR failures (Reagan era)

TOPIC SENTENCE: The USA were extremely suspicious of the intentions of theUSSR in Middle East. Also had bad foreign policy in the US. US embarrassed by


12/21

Vietnam, Watergate, and Iranian hostage. THE SWING TO EXTREME RIGHT,which would bring about New Cold War.

Reagan elected in 1980 (right wing Republican). Referred to USSR as anevil empire

Thatcher and Reagan relationship was bad for the USSR and communismin general

CONCLUSION The Cuban Missile Crisis and the clauses in the foreign policies were what

started Dtente. In the wake of the failures of foreign policies and theevents that had to show for this; dtente failed as well. Dtente signifiedthe beginning of the end of the Cold War and in failing became thestarting point for the New Cold War. The New Cold War would span until1991 after the disbanding of the USSR, but it can be said that theintroduction to the threat of nukes had changed the course of the war andthe USA and the USSR entirely.

Was the role of the United Nations in the Cold War, and what were key examplesof its success and/or failure?

After the failure of the League of Nations, the establishment of the United

Nations was the second attempt at creating a collective security system within

only a few decades. Yet, during the Cold War collective security was going to fail

once again, as most of the world was divided into two blocs. Due to the rigid

structure of the UN that was intended to maintain the status quoof the

international world order, the Security Council (SC) often found itself in a

stalemate situation, unable to act efficiently. Indeed, on several occasions it can

be said that the SC was used as a tool of superpower influence. It would,

however, be inaccurate to say that all of the UNs actions throughout the Cold

War were merely caused by superpower leverage. This essay argues that while

the UN did not achieve its ultimate goal of maintaining peace and security

throughout the Cold War (and still has not done so until today), it was more

successful in fields such as decolonization and human rights. A brief general

overview of the UN System is given, followed by a more focused analysis of cases

in which the UN was said to have been used as a superpower tool, such as Korea

and the Congo. This essay acknowledges, however, that not all UN failures duringthe Cold War were caused by the East-West division but also by other deep


13/21

divisions between states, such as between Israel and its neighbouring countries.

Furthermore, it then discusses UN achievements that were not stymied by

superpower influence, such as diminishing colonialism, supporting the right to

self-determination, serving as a platform for the developing world and

endorsing human rights.

While it was hoped that the UN would be more successful than its predecessor,

both organizations were challenged by very similar issues. Both the League of

Nations and the UN were built upon two fundamentally opposed approaches to

international relations: the tradition of the Concert of Europe andthe Peace

Project tradition. According to the Concert of Europe, the Great Powers were to

have great responsibility and manage and coordinate policies on matters of

common concern, so maintaining a balance of power among states. Of course,

common interest was usually interpreted through the lensof the Great Powers

interests. The Peace Project, on the other hand, that was very much influenced by

Kants Perpetual Peace, rested upon the assumption thateventually war could

be made obsolete through the regional and international cooperation of states.

Hence, the UN was created with liberal idealist intentions primarily to avoid a

third destructive world war and preserve world peace and security, as well as to

recognize the sovereignty of states and give a voice to each state in the General

Assembly (GA). Stalin remarked at Yalta in 1945 that the main thing was toprevent quarrels in the future of the three Great Powers [USA, Britain, and the

USSR] and the task, therefore, was to secure their unity for the future. His view

was shared by President Roosevelt. Thus, from the beginning the UN also

reflected a realist Great Power chain of command, as the main decision-making

organ of the UN, the Security Council, included only five permanent members:

the US, the UK, the USSR, France and China. These five Great Powers agreed to

maintain peace and security for the common good, but especially, of course,

when it was in their own interests. According to Articles 2.3 and 2.4, states

should peacefully settle disputes and the use of force is prohibited. Under Article

39, the SC may decide on the use of force if there is a threat to peace, a breach of

the same, or an act of aggression. Each of the Big-Five received a veto power,

which could stop SC decisions from being made. To this date, the liberal and

realist elements of the UN System remain one of its greatest paradoxes. The UN

still reflects the era of 1945, as its structure does not easily allow for reform.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, most of the world soon split in to two

camps, either under US or Soviet influence. Roosevelts vision of the SecurityCouncil as a board of directors of the world with the responsibility to enforce


14/21

the peace against any potential miscreant collapsed. Each of the two

superpowers focused on preserving order and stability in its own sphere of

influence, while respecting the others bloc. Superpower competition mainly

came to surface in relation to spheres of influence in the developing world, as

well as in strategic areas, and often led to proxy-war type conflicts in these

regions. This competition was, of course, reflected in the SC and the P-5s veto

power would often serve as a tool to create a stalemate, such as in the 1956 Suez

Crisis, the situation in Vietnam from 1946-75, the Sino-Vietnamese conflict in

1979 and Afghanistan from 1979.

The UNs first coercive action took place in Korea. At the time, the Korean

peninsula was divided with a Soviet occupied territory in the North and US

forces in the South. When in 1950 North Korean forces attacked the South,

backed by the Soviet Union, China and other Communist states, President

Truman and Acheson agreed right away that this Communist attack on a non-

Communist state called for action, as a domino-effect of Communist

interventions was feared .The USSR had boycotted the SC since January 1950, as

it disapproved of the presence of a representative of Taiwan in the Chinese

permanent seat. Hence, the US immediately brought up the Korean situation in

the SC, as it was clear there would be no Communist vetoes to a resolution on the

topic. Though it is likely that US decisions would have been the same without the

UN, the SC resolutions on Korea provided international legitimacy to US actionson the Korean peninsula, as Truman was determined to counter the Communist

threat. As soon as the USSR returned to the Council any further action was

prevented. The GA devised the Uniting for Peace Resolution, in order to carry on

with international action. Truman prolonged the war by taking it to the Chinese

border, and it continued until 1953.

While some observers have described this involvement as a type of collective

security engagement, others have considered it a police action and yet others

have called the UNs role in Korea a unique phenomenon. The SC did refer to the

Korean situation as one of aggression and had authorized military support for

South Korea but this was not mandated . Moreover, the key strategic and tactical

plans concerning the Korea conflict may have held the UNs name, but in fact

they were all decided upon in Washington. The legitimacy of the war was, of

course, challenged by the USSR . It is thus not accurate to portray the Korean

War as a classic example of collective security rather in this case it may be

argued that the UN was mainly used by the US as a means to achieve an end

through an international legal framework.


15/21

In 1956, the Suez Canal crisis was rather different from the Korean War. After

Egyptian President Nasser had nationalised the Suez Canal, France, Britain and

Israel claimed the right to the use of force to re-open the Canal and thus attacked

Soviet-backed Egypt against the will of the US. SC action was blocked by the

French and British vetoes. The Uniting for Peace Resolution was called upon to

create a peacekeeping mandate. The UN Emergency Force (UNEF I) was the first

ever armed peace mission that supervised the disengagement of forces and acted

as a buffer between Egypt and Israel. In actual fact, the USSR and the US were not

so far apart in this instance and President Eisenhower was seen as acting in line

with collective security, as he stood against his traditional allies, since their

actions were regarded as aggression. Almost simultaneously to the Suez Canal

conflict, the GA created a resolution that was ignored which called upon the

USSR to remove its forces from Hungary . This indicated that while the UK andFrance could be persuaded, the Soviet Union could not.

Another UN mission, the United Nations Operation in Congo was deployed in the

former Belgian Congo. As a result, the UN was almost bankrupted and Secretary-

General Dag Hammarskjld was mysteriously killed in a plane crash over the

Congo. When Katanga was declared independent, Belgian troops intervened and

several central government ministers approached the US for troops to replace

those of the Belgians. The US ambassador, however, encouraged action to be

taken through the UN to avoid Soviet counter-involvement. Hence, again it maybe argued that the US was merely using the UN as a tool. 10,000 troops were

deployed but their admission to Katanga was refused. While the Western powers

and the UN supported President Kasavubu of Congo, the USSR, its allies and

various non-aligned countries backed Prime Minister Lumumba. The UN

peacekeepers became an enforcement army created through Western support.

Thus, the USSR, and later France, paid no contributions. The USSR even tried to

replace Hammarskjld by a troika of one representative each for the West, the

East and the non-aligned states but this problem was solved when the Secretary-General died. After four years of chaos, a unified Congo was the result.

Nevertheless, the UN had been blemished by its experiences in the Congo and no

more troops were sent to Africa until the End of the Cold War. The United

Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) faced similar problems as those in

Congo and is still active to this date. The US used SC influence to create the

interim force as a means for Israel to withdraw. From 1978 to 1988 there were

no more peacekeeping missions, mainly due to the Reagan administrations

unwillingness to cooperate with the UN as it was seen as a bastion of ThirdWorld nationalism and procommunism.


16/21

While several of the above examples clearly show how UN decisions were

influenced by the East-West division, which is also generally seen as the main

reason for the UNs failure to achieve its ultimate goal during the Cold War, this

can be misleading. Indeed, many conflicts were caused by deep divisions

between other states that had little direct connection with the superpower

division, such as the divisions between India and Pakistan, Israel and its

neighbouring states, and Iran and Iraq. In some ways, these divisions were

intensified because of the UN, for example by the advancement of the idea of

state sovereignty. The USSR and the US were sometimes even found to be

backing the same side in Middle Eastern conflicts, as in the Iran-Iraq war.

Moreover, the Second United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF II) in the 1973

Arab-Israeli War was largely successful with a calming effect on the region, as

well as keeping Israel and Egypt apart.

True, the UN failed in its ultimate aim of maintaining peace and security. Most SC

action was stymied by the superpower conflict. Furthermore, when it did take

action, it was often only used as a superpower tool and in many cases it only

prolonged the conflict (as in Cyprus, where peacekeepers still remain today).

Nevertheless, the UN was not a total failure. It did make important achievements

in fields other than the maintenance of peace and security and the settlement of

disputes.

One of the main areas of UN success was decolonisation, which was supported by

both superpowers, in order to diminish the power of the colonial empires and

gain more spheres of influence. In 1960, when decolonisation was already far

advanced, the GA affirmed that all peoples have the right to self determination

New independent states naturally strove to join the UN, as a sign of their

sovereignty and thus, legitimacy. Gradually, the developing countries began to

form a majority within the GA. The United Nations Conference on Trade and

Development (UNCTAD) was established by developing countries in 1964, as a

means to further their plea for economic justice with a different vision from that

of the Bretton Woods institutions. While efforts to enforce a New International

Economic Order on behalf of the Third World were not very successful, it can be

argued that it was already a significant achievement that the UN provided a

platform for developing countries to formulate a coherent system of ideas,

accepting the principle of sovereign equality. Indeed, the UN was also used as a

tool by the Third World for it to gain influence. Moreover, immense progress

was made in terms of human rights through the approval of important

Declarations and Conventions. Among others, these documents also contributed


17/21

to the codification and further development of international law. Furthermore,

UN specialised agencies such as UNICEF, UNESCO and the World Food

Programme were set up and achieved much in their fields of expertise.

In conclusion, efficient UN action was in fact stymied by superpower conflict thatwas based on both geopolitical and ideological factors. These circumstances led

to many brutal proxy wars, such as in Korea, the Congo and Vietnam, which were

often even prolonged by superpower divisions. Many peacekeeping missions

failed or never left. Atrocious genocides such as in Cambodia and in Guatemala

were not prevented by the UN. Rather than acting as a collective security system,

the SC mostly remained divided throughout the Cold War. Hence, Divided States

may have indeed been a more accurate term than United Nations . Yet, the UN

was not a complete disaster and undoubtedly the Cold War world was better off

with than without it. Some improvements towards peaceful cooperation were

made, largely by simply providing a peaceful platform for global discussion.

Throughout the Cold War, the value of the UN developed into one that was

different from initially intended, focussing more on aspects such as human rights

and self-determination. This is still true to this date and perhaps, it is high time

to rethink the role of the UN. Maintaining global peace and security has so far

proved impossible; however, it ispossible to make small steps forward to

hopefully gradually make this world a better place.


18/21

What were the roles and significance of the major leaders on both sides of theCold War?

Many historians believe that the Cold War was inevitable once the common

enemy, Germany, was defeated after the end of World War II. Other historians

such as John Gaddis stress that neither superpower can be held solely

responsible for the ideological war that lasted half a century. These historians

believe that the US and the USSR followed a pattern of action and reaction; and

that neither nation had a definitive plan of action (Todd, 2009). Also, after

President Roosevelt was replaced by Truman, the US foreign policy adopted a

hardline stance towards communism. Thus, President Truman's hardline stance

foreign policies played a significant role in causing the Cold War because of the

paranoia and upset it caused in the USSR.

One of Truman's policies that may have played a role in starting the Cold War

was the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. According to

historian Kolkos, the war in the Pacific was coming to a close and that there was

really no need for the US to use weapons of mass destruction on Japan. However,

Truman ordered the use of the atomic bombs on Japan as a means to threaten

the USSR and warn them of the great power the US had at its disposal. The

significance of this in causing the Cold War is that it ignited a nuclear, as well as

traditional, arms race which escalated tension between the US and USSR. Thisace-card that the US held caused the USSR to respond by strengthening their

military, working on the development of their own nuclear weapon, and majorly

increasing military spending. Once the USSR had exploded their first nuke in

1949, it caused huge tension because now a real threat of nuclear war existed

and led to a race between the US and the USSR to see who could stockpile the

most weapons.

The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were the hardline stance policies ofthe US that had an important part in causing Cold War tensions. This is because

the USSR took these policies as a direct attack against communism. Stalin coined

the term "dollar imperialism" for the US foreign policies because they offered

economic aid to nations in Europe that were detrimentally affected by WWII in

an attempt to make these nations economically dependent on and politically

influenced by the US. It caused fear and paranoia in the USSR because the soviet

communists believed that the US would gain political and economic control of

the countries in need of aid. It also caused fear and paranoia because the Truman

Doctrine and Marshall plan condemned communism as evil and it took action to


19/21

prevent the spread of communism to any susceptible nation by providing

military assistance. The USSR was upset that the US could do such a thing, thus

they responded furiously to these policies by developing their own similar form

of economic aid. These were called the Molotov Plan and Comecon which

forcefully imposed economic aid on countries such as Czech (even if thesenations wanted the aid of the US instead). These actions and reactions caused

tensions to greatly rise in the Cold War (Todd, 2009). Thus, it can be argued that

it was not only Truman's policies, but Stalin's policies that also played a major

role in the Cold War.

Stalin's foreign policies such as establishing a Soviet-form of communism on a

global scale and creating a buffer zone around the USSR also played a major role

in starting the Cold War. Through the evidence in Kennan's Telegram, Trumanwas able to justify his aggressive policies as a result of the policies of the USSR. In

addition, through Kennan's Telegram, Kennan revealed that the Soviet Union's

domestic policies such as collectivization, purging, etc were evil and inhumane

(Todd, 2009). Thus, the US had no choice but to take a hardline stance against

Soviet-communism to prevent it from spreading. This was the primary

justification of Truman's policies.

In conclusion, Truman's policies played a significant part in the escalation of the

Cold War, however, it was not the sole cause of the war as it was based on a

pattern of action and reaction. Thus, Stalin's policies also played a huge factor in

this ideological war. The fact of the matter is that both the US and the USSR

strongly believed that their own government was the right and just government

for the world and that the Cold War was ultimately started as a result of two

intransigent leaders unwilling to look at the other side.

How did the arms race develop, and what were key examples of its proliferation(spread) and limitation?

What were the major social, cultural, and economic impacts of the Cold War onboth sides and the wider world?

II. End of the Cold War


20/21

How did internal problems and external pressures contribute to the break-up of

the Soviet Union?

In January 1981, Ronald Reagan had become the president of the United Statesand the cold war had reached its peak, despite multiple attempts to reducetensions between the Soviet Union and the US. Reagan came into power withconfident clarity that the Soviet Union, being communist, was an evil empire. Asa result, he developed his military forces and placed economic and diplomaticpressure on the Soviet Union so as to defeat them. Nonetheless, at the same timethe Soviet Union was also facing internal instability. Thus it is questionablewhether it was Reagans policies alone that ended the cold war and allowed him

to claim a triumph.

Firstly, Reagan attempted to reduce the sphere of influence that Soviet Unionhad. One of the main ways that he attempted to do this was by supporting theAfghan resistance from an invasion by the Soviet Union. He continued the policyof supplying arms to the mujahedeen so they would be successful in fighting theguerrilla war. In fact, in 1985, the US gave them stinger shoulder mountedsurface-to-air missiles, which improved their ability to shoot down Soviethelicopters. The soviets were finally forced to withdraw in 1989, unable tosustain the economic costs of the war.

Moreover, to further increase the economic problems that the Soviet Union wasfacing, Regan revived the arms race. He refused the condition placed byGorbachev to cancel the Strategic Defense Initiative, also known as the Star Warsinitiative, which was an anti-nuclear missile defense programs. Though the StarWars Initiative did not work, it posed a huge threat to the Soviet Union, whoincreased their military spending so they would be better able to defendthemselves. By doing this, paired with the earlier economic costs of the war inAfghanistan, the Soviet Union was eventually unable to support its satellite statesand they slowly began to fall with Poland first. Paul du Quenoy claims that someestimates suggest that the Soviets spent as much $50 billion in research anddevelopment to find a way to counter the American system. He supports theclaim that it was due to Regans policies that Cold War was won. This is made

most evident in his statement: the collapse of communist regimes in the ThirdWorld and the draining mire of the Afghan war, events that would almostcertainly not have occurred without the firm commitment of the Reaganadministration, allowed the Soviets neither to achieve the modernization of theireconomy and society nor to save geopolitical face. The Soviet Union had been

defeated both economically and in terms of prestige.

However, other internal factors also had a significant role to play in the downfallof the Soviet Union. These internal factors included Gorbachevs inability to

successfully reform the Soviet Union which was suffering from labour shortagesand low productivity. Basic necessities like soap, salt, matched and washing


21/21

cold war revision guide part ii

Documents