• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far do you agree with the view that is was primarily the existence of contrasting economic systems that prevented the relaxation of superpower tensions in the period 1945-85?

Extracts from this document...


How far do you agree with the view that is was primarily the existence of contrasting economic systems that prevented the relaxation of superpower tensions in the period 1945-85? Emerging from the Second World War were two superpowers with contrasting economic systems. The USA and USSR soon became embroiled in a power struggle across the globe, which was to last until the 1980's. Arguably it was the inherent nature of the contrasting economic systems which prevented a relaxation of superpower tension in the period 1945-85. Tensions began, following the inter-war alliance in Europe, with US recognition that it needed to stabilize its economy as source 1 suggests. Truman believed that Western Europe, as its largest exporter of goods, had to be in a viable position economically, if the US economy was to flourish. As the United States News put it at the time 'if buying power is exhausted, world markets for US goods would disappear'. Marshall Aid was provided to prevent a collapse abroad, ensuring the future of the US economy for the long term. To secure markets in Europe it was also necessary to ensure nations remained capitalist with open markets. Communism under its command economy would shackle the ability of the US to trade, so it was imperative that the US did all it could to keep the Western European markets open. ...read more.


Certain actions by the Soviets led the USA to believe that as source 2 suggest, the Soviet Union were intent 'on destroying' capitalism in their struggle for communist dominance across the world. The support of Communist regimes in Asia, the Middle East and Cuba was suggestive of the USSR's intention to promote what source 3 describes as 'the path from capitalism to socialism'. However, following Stalin's death the USSR moved towards 'peaceful coexistence' believing in the inevitable collapse of capitalism. This suggests that from the Soviet point of view, contrasting economic systems did not prevent the relaxation of super power tensions in the period 1945-85. The Berlin 'problem' is further evidence of the problems competing economic systems caused between the superpowers. Stalin's initial attempt to remove the West via the blockade of 1948, was based upon his fear of a new capitalist West German state being set up. Khrushchev's later decision to provide the West with an ultimatum in 1961, highlights how keen the USSR was to remove the West from Berlin. As source 5 shows, Khrushchev had to do something to 'control the movement between East and West Berlin'. The attraction of capitalism, inside the Communist state of East Germany, was threatening the existence of Communism, with people crossing the border in their hundreds. ...read more.


Although both communist states, Sino-Soviet relations had soured so much that fighting persisted along their shared borders. This split in itself is recognition that superpower tension was not only built upon contrasting economic systems. However, the tripartite order that then existed allowed for an improvement in relations between the USA and both China and the USSR during d�tente. The split allowed the USA to play off one communist superpower against the other as none could afford to alienate the USA so much that they formed an alliance with the other. In conclusion, the two contrasting economic systems alone do not cause such conflict between two nations. It was more the global nature of their politics which necessitated the advancement of their economic models across the globe which undoubtedly led to tension. The USA's need to secure world markets, was in direct opposition to Soviet insistence upon a sphere of influence in order to secure itself against further land invasion. The failure to communicate or to understand each others position is the main reason which prevented the relaxation of superpower tension in the period 1945-85. However, it is certainly true to say that to some extent the existence of contrasting economic systems prevented such a relaxation in tension. The emergence of China as a 3rd world player, and a move towards d�tente actually demonstrated that superpower tensions were relaxed at times, although not to a degree whereby you could suggest that the tensions no longer existed. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Free essay

    The development of the international economy in the period 1945-2000 favoured rich countries at ...

    4 star(s)

    These agreements marginalised the LDCs and hence they were put at a loss, having been left out of potential economic gains. From the beginning of the 1980s, the developed world placed increasingly restrictive protectionist measures against their imports of textiles and apparel from developing countries under the auspices of the Multi-Fibre Arrangements (MFA), as a non-tariff barrier to trade.

  2. Why did tension increase in Europe between 1900 and 1914?

    * Many of the Soviet troops sent to Afghanistan were conscripts, unprepared for the fighting that they were exposed to. Their heavy weapons could not be used effectively and they were subject to constant and sudden attacks. * Increasingly there was little appetite for the war amongst the Soviet troops.

  1. The Sino-Soviet Split

    continue would be inconsistent with the image of national self-sufficiency that he was trying to create. Eventually, he interpreted Stalin's interest in Northern China as a sign of distrust and a "racist" desire to supervise domestic affairs. This realization prompted his famous explosion: 'You think Russians are superior and Chinese

  2. “Generals Win Battles, Resources Win Wars”. How Far Does Your Study of the Period ...

    But generals can also have the opposite effect if they incompetent, or considered as such. During the Boer War, Ladysmith commander White was nicknamed "Invisible White" for his lack of correspondence with his men, and historians have highlighted this as an important reason for the lethargic nature of the troops under his command.

  1. The Korean War and Superpower relations

    In 1948, the US defense budget was leveled at $98.5 billion and by 1951, this amount had increased by 176 % to $439.9 billion. The US also signed the ANZUS pact in 1951 with Australia and New Zealand, whereby US would protect Australia and New Zealand against a resurgent Japan

  2. Neither Stalin, Khrushchev or Brezhnev successfully addressed fundamental economic problems which increasingly dogged the ...

    5 in 1,000 citizens owned a car; his policies combined with the recovery of the USSR since 1945 did mean improvements were made. Working conditions also improved with shorter working hours, more holidays, better pensions and other social benefits. Khrushchev is often blamed for his failings in agriculture (as addressed below)

  1. How far did peaceful coexistence ease Cold War tensions between the Soviet Union and ...

    After an armistice was signed in Paris in 1947, it was agreed that Finland would pay reparations to the Soviet Union for the damages it had caused, and the Porkalla region was leased to the USSR for a period of 50 years.

  2. In the context of the period 1905-2005, how far do you agree that Khrushchev ...

    Therefore Vladimir Putin, who indicates a return to authoritarian rule, whereby media production is censored and suppression of regional provinces (such as Dagestan and Chechnya?s) right to self-governing bodies, may indicate a leadership were comprehension of the consequences of totalitarian rule verses increased civil liberty, are not correctly identified.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work