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

More often than not, superpowers, rather than causing regional conflicts, were reluctantly drawn into them." How far does your study of the Cold War in the period 1950-80 supports this view?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

1. "More often than not, superpowers, rather than causing regional conflicts, were reluctantly drawn into them." How far does your study of the Cold War in the period 1950-80 supports this view? The period of 1950 to 1980 saw the Cold War spread from the traditional playing field of Europe to other parts of the world. However it is quite clear that the USA and the Soviet Union played only a marginal role in originating these conflicts-at the most setting up the basic framework for it to occur. Furthermore, when they did get involved they each did so to varying degrees. The USA seemed to be much more motivated and interested in involving themselves, while the Soviet Union was more apprehensive. Therefore, to say that both superpowers "were reluctantly drawn into them (the conflicts)" is not completely true. To illustrate my point I will analyse the Korean and Vietnam wars. There is strong evidence to suggest that US entered the Korean War fairly voluntarily. Firstly, the US was motivated by strong security interests. They misperceived the North's invasion to be Soviet instigated and an attempt to spread communist ideology into Asia. ...read more.

Middle

Thus Truman felt he had to prove them wrong by taking a harder approach against communism. Also, the US felt that the loss of Vietnam would put a strain of the security of not only Japan but the whole Eastern Pacific which included countries such as Australia and India. Very much in tangent with this, is concerns over the domino theory (invented during this time), where the US believed that if Vietnam fell so would the countries around it, and then the countries around those countries and so on. Thus, they felt they had to stop this communist expansion before it got out of hand. John W. Mason tell us in his book, "The Cold War 1945-1991", that: The Eisenhower administration saw Ho Chi Minh as an instrument of international communism and claimed that the loss of Indochina would have a disastrous effect on the rest of South-east Asia. The domino theory-later to be ridiculed by critics of the Vietnam War-was born."3 Furthermore, US were not only motivated by strategic concerns but also political and economic ones as well. Firstly, US wished to help France, so as to build upon already present friendship and obtain French support in NATO. ...read more.

Conclusion

Perhaps the most important point which shows how reluctant the Soviet Union was in getting involved in the war was the fact that pressed for a quick and peaceful end to it. They got involved due to obligation, maintained as limited role as possible and wanted to get out at the first opportunity. It can thus be seen that the degree of involvement varied depending on the superpower. While neither superpower played a significant role in originating either conflicts, the US got more involved in them as compared to the Soviets. This was mainly due to the fact that the US had a greater interest in these conflicts than the Soviets, and thus were more strongly motivated to intervene. Thus, it can be said that US were fairly voluntary in their involvement in these regional conflicts, as they sought to further their own interests. US actions and policies during these conflicts also seemed to suggest voluntary involvement as they seldom showed signs of disengagement but rather tended towards escalation. The Soviets however, very much unmotivated to get involved, were cautious with regards to their involvement in the wars, playing as limited a role as possible. Thus one cannot say that the statement, is completely true, though it may be to a fairly large extent. ...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. Why did North Korea invade South Korea in June 1950, and why did USA ...

    Korea was next to China and Russia and it was likely to appear there next. US were also interested in Korea because they had just fought a four year war for Pacific influence with Japan. If they left then they would have fought for nothing.

  2. How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold ...

    This fight for Greece only showed both the United States and Soviet Union's aggressive side and both felt threatened of each other. The Marshall Plan was a plan to provide financial aid to the war-torn countries across Europe. However the aid was only given to non-communist countries which angered the

  1. The Sino-Soviet Split

    Then, during meetings, he expressed an unwillingness to draw up a new treaty on the basis that such action might give the West a pretext for revisionism over the control of certain offshore islands. Mao eventually agreed to give up the idea, and left Moscow defeated, only to be faced

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

    To analyse the question that is the core of this essay, we must first define both resources and the generals who make use of them. The existence and role of the General Staff must be discussed before the 'general' can be defined.

  1. How far was the USSR responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War?

    Kennan claimed in his Long Telegram in February 1946 that the USSR was going to expand all over the world and therefore must be contained. His telegram alarmed the USA and eventually led to the policy of containment. Moreover, Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech made at Fulton, Missouri did not only

  2. In the years 1953-1960 was president Eisenhowers cold war diplomacy based on confrontation rather ...

    Eisenhower himself had increased use of covert operations countries that would destabilise the forces of communism, such as those in Iran. He also had a policy of ?brinkmanship? in which the USA would threaten with nuclear war if the USSR spread communism.

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

    The ceasefire ordered upon North Korea, the reunification of Austria and the return of the Porkalla region to Finland were all signs to the West that the new Soviet foreign policy meant a more conciliatory Soviet Union. But actions in Hungary and Berlin showed the extent that this new conciliatory nature was allowed to go.

  2. In the years 1953-60, President Eisenhowers cold war diplomacy was based on confrontation rather ...

    Even if so it evidently confronts communism, and I would say even in a harsher manner when it used to be under Truman. Just weeks after Eisenhower became president, Stalin?s death brought what appeared to be a significant changes in Soviet international policy.

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