Soviets became frightened by the United States’ policies. They were going to negotiate with Reagan at first but because of military buildup, lack of interest in arms control, Soviets were afraid Reagan would attack the nation. So, “Soviets kept the KGB (Russia’s version of the Federal Bureau of Investigation) on alerted from 1981 to 1983 just in case”.(5) A Russian military plane had shot down a South Korean civilian airliner that was flying over Soviet territory. The plane was traveling from Anchorage, Alaska to Seoul Korea. Sixty one Americans were killed on the flight. When the United States heard about this, Reagan was angry. He denounced that the “Korean airline massacre” was a “crime against humanity” for
-
Ralph B. Levering, (1988), The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, P.169.
-
Ralph B. Levering, (1988), The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, P.171-172.
-
Ralph B. Levering, (1988), The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, P.173.
which “there was absolutely no justification legal or moral”(6) Soviets said that they thought it was a spy plane and when they inquired who it was, they received no answer. That is why they shot it down. This crisis gave more tension to the cold war situation. On September 23, 1985, Andropov, the Soviet leader at the time, issued “one of the most strong anti-American statements since the Stalin Era”.(7) He accused the United States of pursuing a militarist course that is designed to achieve “dominant positions in the world without reckoning with the interests of the other states and peoples”.(8) Soviet leaders thought that the United States’ response to the airliner incident combined with the continuing lack of progress on arms control, was proof that they should not improve relations with the United States. On That December, they withdrew from the arms control negotiations in Geneva. For this reason negotiations that would end the cold war were stopped. Reagan proposed a program called “Strategic Defense Initiative (Also known as “Star Wars”).” The program was where an experimental rocket was launched off a remote island and intercepted an incoming ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) warhead that was about one hundred miles above earth. This was a demonstration of the Pentagon’s ability to solve the problems of ballistic-missile defense.
President Reagan commented on “Star Wars” and said “What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon the threat of instant United States retaliation to deter Soviet attack, that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil and that of our allies?” (9) It was Reagan’s support for “Star Wars” that enabled Gorbachev to take the initiative soon after coming to power in spring of 1985. Most Western Europeans derided “Star Wars” as “a pointless escalation in the arms race” and Gorbachev thought this way also. Gorbachev denounced “Star Wars” and tried to show that Russia was a peaceful nation. He reduced the number of 22 to 20 missiles
- "The End of the Cold War" http://www.usa.coldwar.server.gov/index/coldwar/ 2 Feb.
1997.
-
John Young, (1991), Cold War Europe 1945-1989, New York: Edward Allen, P.28
-
John Young, (1991), Cold War Europe 1945-1989, New York: Edward Allen, P.28
-
Ralph B. Levering, (1988), The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, P.180.
aimed at Western Europe and also announced a comment on underground nuclear testing. Russia also offered to make deep cuts in its missiles if the United States would stop researching “Star Wars”. Gorbachev arranged a summit meeting in Geneva with Ronald Reagan which is where they had talks about “Star Wars”. Little progress was made on arms control and Reagan was held responsible. Gorbachev and Reagan also met in Reykjavik. Gorbachev challenged Reagan to try to negotiate a comprehensive arms control agreement that weekend. Gorbachev offered a few important ideas. He agreed in principle to the 1981 United States proposal to take off medium range missiles from Europe and suggested that there be a 50% cut in strategic weapons for the next five years.(10)
Then, Reagan suggested that they destroy all ballistic missiles for the next ten years and Gorbachev responded by suggesting they abolish all nuclear missiles. Reagan agreed but then Gorbachev made it clear the any further research of SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) should only be done in the laboratory. Reagan then said that this restriction would “kill” SDI. When Gorbachev refused to move his position, Reagan left. Reagan was forced to choose between “Star Wars” and a deal that would end Soviet nuclear threat through disarmament, Reagan’s basic partialism and distrust of Russia won. In February, Gorbachev offered to separate the European intermediate range missile issue from strategic and space weapons issues and said that he supported the long standing United States proposal to remove all Soviet and United States intermediate range missiles from Europe. Reagan responded positively to Gorbachev’s speech and he resumed talks with Gorbachev. Levering noted in his book that Mikhail Gorbachev said “The modern world has become much too small and fragile for wars and policy of force. It cannot be saved and preserved if the thinking and actions built up over the centuries on the acceptability and permissibility of wars and armed conflicts are not shed after all...[If the arms race continues] The situation in the world may assume such a character that it will no longer depend on the intelligence or will of political leaders. It may become captive to technology, to technocratic logic”.(11)
-
John Young, (1991), Cold War Europe 1945-1989, New York: Edward Allen, P.28
-
Ralph B. Levering, (1988), The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, P.187-188.
Reagan agreed with Gorbachev and the United States signed nuclear arms treaty eliminating all the intermediate range missiles centred in Europe. This was the first ever agreement that eliminated whole class of nuclear weapons. American officials were sent to Russia to make sure that any violations were discovered. In his speech to the United Nations on December 8, 1988, Gorbachev announced the withdrawal of fifty thousand Soviet troops in Eastern Europe. The withdrawn forces were tanks and units with bridging equipment. The West conceded that the Eastern section had stronger non nuclear forces and that to move toward equal in Europe required deeper reduce on the Eastern side than the Western side. The Soviet Communist Party agreed to let Poland have a democratic election on June 5 1989. In the elections, Solidarity (a labor union) won a landslide victory. Despite Solidarity’s win Communists still regained control of the Parliament. The reason was that election rules guaranteed it a majority of seats. However Solidarity won almost all the seats it was allowed to compete for. This Polish election that allowed the opposition to share power with the Communist Party was a major part of the historic movement for political reform in the Soviet Union. On November 11, 1989, the Berlin Wall came down. This marked the end of the cold war. East Germany has announced that all border restrictions were lifted. President Bush wanted to “seize every chance” to promote democracy in Eastern Europe Secretary of State James Baker called the lifting of the German travel restrictions “the most dramatic event in East West relations” since World War II.(12) George Bush had comments on the Berlin Wall also. He went to Mainz, in Germany where he said a few words about that: “For 40 years, the seeds of democracy in Eastern Europe lay dormant, buried under the frozen tundra of the Cold War. And for 40 years the world has waited for the Cold War to end. And decade after decade, time after time, the flowering human spirit withered from the chill of conflict and oppression. And again the world waited. But the passion for freedom cannot be denied forever. The world has waited
12) Brinkley, Alan An Uneasy Peace 1988, Vol. 10 of 20th Century America, 10
vols. (New York: Grolier 1995): 30
long enough. The time is right. Let Europe be whole and free”.(13) The United States of America played a huge role in the ending of the cold war. Though we made relations worse, we also helped end it. Reagan’s “Star Wars” policies made Russians very nervous.
There were many factors that brought about the end of the Cold War. “The declining Soviet economy, the rise of Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, the initiatives take by the U.S. and the Soviet Union were all influential determinates” that helped bring the Cold War to an end. In addition “Individual statesmen” which I will analyze in the next point is a factor in which Gorbachev’s improve of the economic and political policies as well as “Reagan’s aggressive military spending” tactics play a big role, while “long term impersonal factors include the inherent inefficiency of the Soviet system and the long term policy of containment carried out by the West”.(14) The Soviets had enjoyed great achievements on the international stage before Reagan entered office in 1981. These achievements included the unification of their socialist ally, Vietnam in 1976.
Firstly, individual statesmen factor, the analyzing of the impact of it we must realize that two particular individuals who played rather different active roles in bringing about the Cold War. One was Reagan, the President of the USA in the 1980s. His aggressive tack with regard to military build up and ideological attack was one of the major motives for the end of Cold War as it backed the Soviet Union into a corner from which they could not escape. He built up US military power to attain clear victory over the Soviet Union. Increased defence spending and advanced research projects backed up his foreign policy goals, which included the rolling back of Soviet style communism. The Strategic Defence Initiative(SDI) in particular had a major impact on Soviet foreign policy as it hinted at a major arms race in which the Soviet Union could not hope to compete. Such rapid military build up forced the
13) "George Bush addresses Europe" http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/burke/ 13 March
1997.
14) Ronald E Powaski (1998), The Cold War, Oxford: Oxford U Press, p.231
Soviet Union to respond by increased spending, which rapidly make the economic disintegration of its already flailing system. The ideological attack that he adopted also enabled the West to seize the moral high ground. It can be said that the Reagan administration forced the Soviet leadership to confront internal weaknesses, of which there were quite a few.
Another individual we have to consider would be Gorbachev. Gorbachev’s introduction of a less aggressive and a more purely defensive foreign policy and the steps he took with regards to “arms reduction signaled a change in tone for the Cold War as it led to the Soviet Union focusing more on internal problems, which caused the disintegration of the communist Soviet Union as many of these problems were exacerbated and exposed by Gorbachev’s reform-minded attempts to solve them”.(15) Gorbachev’s reevaluation of military doctrine include the introduction of the concept of reasonable sufficiency, which led to smaller numbers of nuclear weapons, and taking on a more purely defensive tack in conventional warfare. He also worked to gain arms reduction, in particular by his act of signing the Intermediate Range Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty which removed a whole category of nuclear weapons. The more significant decisions made by Gorbachev was those which clearly showed a change in ideological content, in particular his announcement of troop reduction in Eastern Europe and the western part of the Soviet Union as well as his renouncement of the Brezhnev Doctrine. Gorbachev’s decisions and policies led loose the reins that was active role in keeping the communist Soviet Union whole and intact in its position as a superpower, as it shown internal Soviet weaknesses which could not be solved. Therefore, we can see how the two individual statesmen were active role in bringing about an end to the Cold War Reagan with his aggressive military policy and ideological attack which exposed and exploited the inherent weaknesses of the Soviet Union, and Gorbachev whose reevaluated policies led to communist Soviet Union losing more and more of its power.
15) Barbara Farnham (2001), Reagan and the Gorbachev revolution: Perceiving the end of threat Political Science Quarterly; New York, p.83
While these individual statesmen were highly active role in the process, I believe that long term impersonal factors had more to do with ending the Cold War. This is because the role of individual statesmen and the decisions they make, while being immediate motivation to the end of the Cold War, would not have been sufficient enough on its own to bring an end to the Cold War. It is because they were backed up and based on long term impersonal factors that the actions of these individual statesmen were able to end the Cold War.
One such long term impersonal factor would be the inherent inefficiency of the Soviet system which rendered it almost impossible for it to be a permanent alternative of the great powers of the world, in particular, the USA. This inefficiency is characterized by economic decline, “a problem which was further worsened by military demands, technical backwardness, ever increasing social problems and other resources. Such inefficiency highlights bureaucratic and governance failures, and added on to the sadness of the people, thus hurry the end of the Soviet’s hold of power in the Cold War”.(16) These inherent flaws affected some of Gorbachev’s decisions, mainly those to do with releasing the Soviet hold on Eastern Europe as well as arms reduction. Gorbachev’s decision to do so was aided by the knowledge it would relieve pressure on the Soviet system. Therefore we can see how the inherent inefficiencies of the Soviet system rendered it impossible for the Soviet to continue permanently as the rival powerhouse in the Cold War as it showed the basic inferiorities of the Soviet system in relation to the Western system. Such inefficiencies also formed the basis on which the impact of the actions of individual statesmen happened. For example, without these inefficiencies, Gorbachev would have maybe been more able to handle the West more decisively and in a strong Soviet style manner, without being braking down by internal problems and attempts to solve them.
16) Ending the Cold War, Foreign Affairs Spring 1988, 28
Another long term impersonal factor was the long term policy of containment carried out by the West. Combined with an active attack on human rights and as well as the aid to opposition in Afghanistan and Poland, this managed to effectively pose ideological, economic and military obstacles to Soviet agenda. This policy of containment was “characterized by systems of nuclear deterrence, large conventional forces and subsidization of a global network of allied states, all working against communism”.(17) We can see how such a concerted effort at containment, heightened at a time when the Soviet Union was already struggling with problems brought about by the inefficiencies of its system, hurry the end of the Cold War by making it almost inevitable that the communist Soviet empire disintegrate and lose its stand as a Cold War powerhouse. Had this policy of containment not existed, the decisions of Reagan in particular would not have generated much effect in ending the Cold War as he would not have been backed as much politically nor would he have been able to seize the moral high ground on which to legitimize his actions or decisions. Finally, therefore, on the whole I believe that long term impersonal factors, such as inherent inefficiencies of the Soviet system as well as the continued Western policy of containment, did more to bring about the end of the Cold War than the actions or decisions of individual statesmen.
17) Jeremi Suri, Explaining the End of the Cold War: A New Historical Consensus?, Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 4 no. 4 (Fall 2002), pp 60-92.
To sum up this essay I would say truly that the end of the Cold War is a key event in modern history, one that demanded bold individuals and decisive action. I think Reagan and Gorbachev will be the standard reference, a work that is critical to our understanding of the present and the past. At the end of the readings and the essay I reached and came about two conclusions regarding lessons which should be learned from the end of the Cold War. Firstly, and most importantly, the Cold War should be understood as a non linear process. That is, the effect of the different explanation variables is not added, but multiplicative. A series of causal chains came into confluence, interacting and causing a synergism that resulted in the end of the Cold War. Secondly, it was amazing how badly leaders miscalculated during the end of the end of the Cold War. I contend that Gorbachev probably would not have headed down the path towards glasnost and perestroika if he had known the results. An important question: Why did Gorbachev and his advisors misjudge so badly? One hypothesis argues that Soviet leaders could not possibly understand the possible impact of the reforms because the Soviet Union had always been ruled by an authoritarian regime. So, the possibility of the dissolution of the Soviet Union probably did not even enter the mind of Gorbachev when he made those fateful decisions during the mid of to late 1980s.
Bibiolography:
* Walter Lippman, The Cold War: A Study in U.S. Foreign Policy, New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1947.
* Charles S. Maier, ed., The Cold War in Europe: Era of a divided Continent, NewYork: Markus Wiener Publishing, Inc, 1991.
* Ralph B. Levering, The Cold War, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, INC, 1988.
* John Young, Cold War Europe 1945-1989, New York: Edward Allen, 1991.
* Ronald E Powaski, The Cold War, Oxford: Oxford U Press, 1998.
* Barbara Farnham, Reagan and the Gorbachev revolution: Perceiving the end of threat" Political Science Quarterly; New York; Summer, 2001.
* Jeremi Suri, Explaining the End of the Cold War: A New Historical Consensus?, Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 4 no. 4 (Fall 2002),pp 60-92.
* The End of the Cold War, 1997, available at:
* Tom Morganthou, Reagan’s cold war ‘sting’?, Newsweek 32 August 1993: 32
* Ending the Cold War, Foreign Affairs Spring 1988: 24-25
* Brinkley, Alan An Uneasy Peace 1988,Vol. 10 of 20th Century America, 10 vols. (New York: Grolier 1995):22
* Rutvij Bhatt, 1997 “George Bush addresses Europe” available at:
*